one involves duii diversion, the other sex crimes

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

by: Ryan • June 18, 2012 • no comments

Here are the questions presented in the DUII diversion case:

State of Oregon v. Carrie Lynn Wilson (S060198) (A144705) (appeal from Deschutes County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 247 Or App 761, 270 P3d 411 (2012)). Defendant Carrie Lynn Wilson has been granted review of a per curiam Court of Appeals decision reversing and remanding a trial court decision that declined to terminate defendant's diversion agreement for failure to pay the diversion filing fee within the diversion period, that concluded that defendant had successfully completed diversion, and that ultimately dismissed the driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) charge against defendant. On review, the issues are: (1) Do the DUII diversion statutes require the diversion filing fee to be paid within the diversion period before a court is authorized to dismiss a DUII charge? (2) Did the diversion agreement that defendant signed require her to pay the diversion filing fee within the diversion period before she was eligible for dismissal of her DUII charge? (3) Does a trial court retain discretion to permit the dismissal of a DUII charge if, due to indigency, the diversion filing fee has not been paid at the end of the diversion period?

And the sex case:

State of Oregon v. William Perez (S060132) (A143108) (appeal from Washington County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 247 Or App 353, 271 P3d 154 (2011)). Defendant William Perez has been granted review of a Court of Appeals decision that affirmed without opinion his convictions for rape I and sexual abuse I. On review, the issues are: (1) May a prosecutor refresh a witness's memory by reading portions of a police report in the form of a question? (2) May a police officer and a sexual assault nurse examiner testify as to the details of a complaint of sexual misconduct, or must their testimony be limited to the fact of the complaint alone?