Summary
construing State v. Hartfield, 290 Or. 583, 624 P.2d 588
Summary of this case from State v. EtzelOpinion
August 26, 2003
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Petitions for Review
Oregon Supreme Court
Aug 26, 2003
335 Or. 656 (Or. 2003)
Summaries of
Petitions for Review
Oregon Supreme Court
Aug 26, 2003
335 Or. 656 (Or. 2003)
construing State v. Hartfield, 290 Or. 583, 624 P.2d 588
Summary of this case from State v. Etzelnoting that, under Hartfield, the “or” in subsection is conjunctive, and concluding that, as a result, the “defendant's criminal trespass conviction [could not] be predicated on subsection because he did not enter or remain on ‘premises * * * not open to the public’ ” (omission in original)
Summary of this case from State v. Davisstating that two people who stayed at a hotel for a period exceeding 30 days became tenants entitled to the protections of the RLTA
Summary of this case from Greene v. Hrenconstruing relevant statutes to require person in charge of premises to make such a request
Summary of this case from State v. WilliamsCase details for
Petitions for Review
Case Details
Full title:PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
Court:Oregon Supreme Court
Date published: Aug 26, 2003
Citations
335 Or. 656 (Or. 2003)
75 P.3d 899
Citing Cases
Williams v. Belleque
On appeal, the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed without opinion and the Oregon Supreme Court denied review.…
Williams v. BellequeOn appeal, the Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed without opinion and the Oregon Supreme Court denied review.…