State v. Pettypool
This text of 676 P.2d 368 (State v. Pettypool) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
STATE of Oregon, Respondent,
v.
Georgia PETTYPOOL, Appellant.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Steven W. Black and Black & Elliott, Corvallis, filed brief, for appellant.
Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., James E. Mountain, Jr., Sol. Gen., and Richard D. Wasserman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem, filed brief, for respondent.
Before BUTTLER, P.J., and WARREN and ROSSMAN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
The only error assigned on appeal is that defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel. That claim requires an evidentiary hearing and, except in extraordinary cases, may not be raised on direct appeal. State v. Chase, 51 Or. App. 289, *369 624 P.2d 1100 (1981). Because this is not such a case, the issue must be resolved by habeas corpus proceedings where, as here, defendant has not been convicted of a crime, ORS 138.510(1), but has been found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect, and the court found that defendant would have been convicted of the crime if she had been found responsible.
Appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
676 P.2d 368, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-pettypool-orctapp-1984.