A Book from the Library of Defense

Oregon Appellate Court, July 8, 2021

From OCDLA Library of Defense
Jump to: navigation, search

by: Rankin Johnson • July 8, 2021 • no comments


Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA

SELF-DEFENSE - Initial aggressor

Trial court did not err by giving uniform instruction on the reduced availability of self-defense to initial aggressor, where defendant spit on the victim at the start of the encounter. Affirmed.

The court reversed defendant's convictions that were based on nonunanimous jury verdicts, including a Class B misdemeanor.

State v. Phillips 313 Or App 1 (July 8, 2021) (Ortega) (Multnomah County, Oden-Orr)

TRESPASSING - Boundaries

In trial for trespassing as violation, it was no defense that defendant was not informed of the boundaries of the property, a coffee stand with an attached parking area. Affirmed.

Because the state elected violation treatment, there was no mens rea element.

State v. Cervantes 313 Or App 29 (July 8, 2021) (Lagesen) (Coos County, Pruess)

SENTENCING - Compensatory fines

Sentencing court did not err by imposing compensatory fine for uncharged offenses, because the fine was within the statutory limits for defendant's convictions. Affirmed.

State v. Bolton 313 Or App 41 (July 8, 2021) (Shorr) (Washington County, Erwin)

SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Particularity of warrant for electronic data

When a warrant contains both valid and invalid authorizations to search, the state bears the burden to show that particular evidence is untainted by unlawful portions of the warrant. Reversed and remanded.

The court explained that electronic-data search warrants were required to be linked to particular sorts of data. The court remanded for a determination of what evidence was actually discovered pursuant to valid warrant terms.

State v. Turay 313 Or App 45 (July 8, 2021) (James) (Washington County, Garcia)

DEFENSES - Choice of evils

Defendant's vague concerns about being assaulted while homeless and sleeping outside did not provide a choice-of-evils defense to a trespassing charge. Affirmed.

The court also rejected the argument that the Eighth Amendment prevents prosecuting homeless people for trespassing on private property.

City of Eugene v. Adams 313 Or App 67 (July 8, 2021) (James) (Lane County, Rigmaiden)

THEFT - Mens rea

Evidence that property was stolen is not sufficient to prove that defendant knew it was stolen. Reversed.

The court affirmed as to other counts, and rejected arguments based on the defendant's request to represent himself and on jury instructions permitting nonunanimous verdicts.

State v. Mull 313 Or App 87 (July 8, 2021) (Powers) (Klamath County, Adkisson)

JURY UNANIMITY - Concurrence instructions

Any error in failing to give concurrence instruction was harmless. Affirmed.

Defendant was accused of criminal mistreatment based on a recurring condition under which elderly women under defendant's care were in a locked house behind a locked gate, such that emergency assistance could not easily reach them. Because the dangerous conditions only got worse over time, there was no reason to believe that any juror would vote to convict defendant based on one instance but not the other.

State v. Camphouse 313 Or App 109 (July 8, 2021) (Kamins) (Linn County, Novotny)

TRAFFIC OFFENSES - Juvenile offenders

It does not violate separation of powers or due process for juvenile traffic cases to be waived collectively to adult court, subject to individual waiver back to juvenile court. Affirmed.

State v. Reasoner 313 Or App 139 (July 8, 2021) (Kistler) (Washington County, Menchaca)