History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Galloway
31 Or. App. 393
Or. Ct. App.
1977
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The state confesses error.

Reversed and remanded.






Concurrence Opinion

TANZER, J.,

concurring.

I concur to point out that reversal in a case such as this does not follow automatically from a confession of error. The United States Supreme Court has stated the rule which I trust is implicit in the cryptic majority opinion:

"* * * Confessions of error are, of course, entitled to and given great weight, but they do not 'relieve this Court of the performance of the judicial function.’ Young v. United States, 315 US 257, 258, 86 L Ed 832, 834, 62 S Ct 510 (1942). * * *” Sibron v. New York, 392 US 40, 58, 88 S Ct 1889, 20 L Ed 2d 917 (1968).

I concur inasmuch as I agree with appellant’s assignment of error and the underlying analysis of the state’s confession.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Galloway
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Date Published: Oct 24, 1977
Citation: 31 Or. App. 393
Docket Number: No. T-7-5794, CA 8859
Court Abbreviation: Or. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.