Narrative Opinion Summary
The appeals are dismissed for two main reasons: 1. The judgments in question are based on non-federal grounds that are sufficient to uphold them, referencing cases such as Doyle v. Atwell, Cox v. Colorado, and Woolsey v. Best. 2. There is a lack of a substantial federal question, supported by precedents including Twining v. New Jersey, Snyder v. Massachusetts, Brown v. Mississippi, and Palko v. Connecticut. The lower court's decision is reported at 157 Ore. 505; 72 P. 2d 533.
Legal Issues Addressed
Absence of a Substantial Federal Questionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appeals were further dismissed due to the absence of a substantial federal question, following the precedent set by previous cases.
Reasoning: There is a lack of a substantial federal question, supported by precedents including Twining v. New Jersey, Snyder v. Massachusetts, Brown v. Mississippi, and Palko v. Connecticut.
Dismissal of Appeals Based on Non-Federal Groundssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appeals were dismissed because the judgments are supported by sufficient non-federal grounds, meaning they do not rely on federal law for validation.
Reasoning: The judgments in question are based on non-federal grounds that are sufficient to uphold them, referencing cases such as Doyle v. Atwell, Cox v. Colorado, and Woolsey v. Best.