OSC Grants Review of Sleep-Driving Case

This wikilog article is a draft, it was not published yet.

by: Ryan • July 2, 2012 • no comments

From the OSC press release:

State of Oregon v. James Robert Newman (S060182) (A142837) (appeal from Multnomah County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 246 Or App 334, 265 P3d 86 (2011)).

Defendant James Robert Newman seeks review of a Court of Appeals decision affirming a trial court's evidentiary ruling that had excluded defendant's proffered evidence of "sleep-driving" in his trial for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) on the basis that the proffered evidence was not relevant because DUII is a strict liability offense.

On review, the issues are:

(1) Does the DUII statute's driving element require a culpable mental state?

(2) Does the DUII statute's driving element require volition?

(3) In a DUII prosecution, must a defendant be allowed to raise as a defense that, owing to conduct or a physical condition other than intoxication, he lacked the culpable mental state required for driving a motor vehicle, and he did not voluntarily drive a motor vehicle?