https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Blog%3ACase_Reviews%2FOregon_Supreme_Court_04-08-10 2026-05-29T21:55:54Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.19.24 https://libraryofdefense.ocdla.org/index.php?title=Blog:Case_Reviews/Oregon_Supreme_Court_04-08-10&diff=7878&oldid=prev 2012-12-21T00:22:50Z

<p>Importing text file</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>''Read the full article for details about the following new cases:''<br /> * Departures - Failure to Deter - Separate Malevolent Quality<br /> <br /> The Supreme Court takes a final axe to the ''separate malevolent quality'' requirement for some departure factors. Previously, in [http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S52251.htm Bray], they decided that proving ''persistent involvement'' required only that the number and frequency of convictions was recurrent and continuing. Here, they find that ''failure to deter ''requires only that the defendant should have been deterred by his prior criminal sanctions and was not. No separate proof regarding defendant's character is required. In this case, defendant had 37 convictions and at least 34 sanctions for supervision violations. Thus, there was &quot;no legitimate debate&quot; that prior sanctions failed to deter defendant. ''[http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/S057150.htm State v. Lennon]''<br /> {{wl-publish: 2010-04-07 21:00:00 -0700 | abassos }}</div>

Maintenance script