From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Lovesee

Court of Appeals of Oregon
Feb 21, 2013
298 P.3d 68 (Or. Ct. App. 2013)

Summary

In Lovesee v. State, 137 Wis. 94, 118 N.W. 553, it was held that the fact that a judgment was not entered in a criminal case was not sufficient ground for refusing to consider a writ of error, but the scope of the writ of error was not deemed broad enough to encompass a motion for a new trial under sec. 358.11, Stats., and the writ in that case was dismissed.

Summary of this case from Martin v. State

Opinion

NO. A149068

2013-02-21

State v. Michael Joseph Lovesee


AFFIRMED WITHOUT OPINION.


Summaries of

State v. Lovesee

Court of Appeals of Oregon
Feb 21, 2013
298 P.3d 68 (Or. Ct. App. 2013)

In Lovesee v. State, 137 Wis. 94, 118 N.W. 553, it was held that the fact that a judgment was not entered in a criminal case was not sufficient ground for refusing to consider a writ of error, but the scope of the writ of error was not deemed broad enough to encompass a motion for a new trial under sec. 358.11, Stats., and the writ in that case was dismissed.

Summary of this case from Martin v. State
Case details for

State v. Lovesee

Case Details

Full title:State v. Michael Joseph Lovesee

Court:Court of Appeals of Oregon

Date published: Feb 21, 2013

Citations

298 P.3d 68 (Or. Ct. App. 2013)
255 Or. App. 511

Citing Cases

Martin v. State

While that case is not particularly in point on the question of what may be reviewed by a writ of error, it…