State v. Rathie
| Decision Date | 20 September 1921 |
| Citation | State v. Rathie, 200 P. 790, 101 Or. 368 (Or. 1921) |
| Parties | STATE v. RATHIE ET AL. |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
In Banc.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Umatilla County; Gilbert W. Phelps Judge.
On petition for rehearing.Former opinion adhered to and rehearing denied.
For former opinion, see199 P. 169.
See also, 200 P. 790.
Charles F. Bolin, of Toppenish, Wash., and Thomas H Wilson, of Yakima, Wash., for appellants.
I. H Van Winkle, Atty. Gen., and R.I. Keator, Dist. Atty., and C. Z. Randall, Deputy Dist. Atty., both of Pendleton, for the State.
We have carefully considered the petition of the defendants for a rehearing, and are unable to find therefrom any substantial reason for deviating from the views expressed in the original opinion.It is true that by inadvertence it was stated that Edward J. Clark, an attorney of Pendleton, was a nonresident of the county, but in view of what we consider the weight of affidavit testimony introduced on the motion for a change of venue, we do not look upon that fact as controlling.The motion was heard before a judge who had resided in the county for many years, and who by his long residence and necessary acquaintance over the county was well qualified to pass upon the condition of the public mind and to appraise the value of the testimony introduced relating to this matter.
The other matters urged in the petition for rehearing were carefully considered before...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Lamb v. State
... ... 68, 109 Kan. 780; Ernst v ... State, 193 N.W. 978, 181 Wis. 155; Smith v ... Commonwealth, 146 S.W. 4, 148 Ky. 60; State v ... Ray, 207 P. 192, 111 Kan. 350; State v ... Richardson, 237 S.W. 765, 291 Mo. 566; State v ... Latshaw, 237 S.W. 770, 291 Mo. 592; State v ... Rathie, 20 P. 790, 101 Or. 368; People v ... Mooney, 174 P. 325, 178 Cal. 525; People v ... Drysch, 143 N.E. 100, 311 Ill. 342; Sease v ... State, 247 S.W. 1036, 157 Ark. 217 ... Where a ... judgment of conviction of a crime has been affirmed on writ ... of error, the trial court cannot ... ...
-
State v. Huffman
...between the ancient writ and the modern motion which has been substituted therefor. We will first consider the case of State v. Rathie, 101 Or. 368, 200 P. 790. The defendant in that case was convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of Sheriff Tillman Taylor. State v. Rathie, 1921, 1......
-
Huffman v. Alexander
...the desirability of remedial legislation. Only once has the writ of error coram nobis been directly before this court. In State v. Rathie, 101 Or. 368, 200 P. 790, one who had been convicted of murder in the first degree attempted to sue out a writ of error coram nobis in the circuit court ......
-
Dorn v. Three Rivers Sch. Dist.
...involved individual voir dire of prospective jurors. See State v. Rathie et al. , 101 Or. 339, 348-49, 199 P. 169, reh'g den. , 101 Or. 368, 200 P. 790 (1921) ; Megorden , 49 Or. at 263, 88 P. 306. Specifically, the lawyers for the parties in those cases examined and the court ruled on each......