Court Opinion

ID: 9569291
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:12:29.546484+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:53:06.532918
License: Public Domain

GILLETTE, J.,
concurring in part and specially concurring in part.
I join in the court’s disposition of this case and in most of its analysis supporting that disposition. However, I believe the peculiar posture of the defendant’s claim in the Court of Appeals concerning his statements of August 17-18 calls for a more summary disposition than that given it by the majority. I therefore write separately.
As noted by the majority, the only claim this defendant advanced in the Court of Appeals concerning his statements of August 17-18 was that the statements were involuntary because he was in hospital. 303 Or 518 at 527. That argument is not well taken, in view of the findings of fact made by the trial judge and fully supported by the record. The Court of Appeals should have confined itself to resolving that issue, and so should we. The balance of the majority’s discussion on the voluntariness of the August 17-18 statements in this court may be correct — although I think the issue is very close — but I would not carry on that part of the discussion at all.
I agree with the majority’s discussion of the August 20 statements.