OCDLA Library of Defense - Latest Case Reviews
Blog
Is A Defendant Entitled to a Jury Trial On Restitution?by: Ryan Scott • June 13, 2025 • no comments Today, the OSC issued a press release that announced one case it was granting review on, and a number of cases it was not. Among those cases where the court was not granting review, individual justices either said they would have granted review or, more likely, concurred in the denial of review but felt the issue was worth addressing in a future case. In other words, the individual justices were alerting lawyers -- defense lawyers in particular -- of issues they would like to see raised in future cases. One of those cases was State v. Anne. Justices DeHoog and James both concurred in the denial of review "but observed that the petition raised an important legal issue that the Court should consider in an appropriate case." Do they say what that issue is? Nope, I had to look up the case to find out what the issue was. And let me tell you, it's a doozy. → continue reading...How to Keep Out The Forensic Interviewby: Ryan Scott • May 21, 2025 • no comments For the past couple of years, I have encouraged a variety of arguments for keeping out the forensic interview in child sex cases. Not a lot of appellate success so far. Right now, though, I want to focus on excluding it under OEC 403. I've made the argument a couple of times myself, I've written an appellate brief on the issue, I've read other appellate briefs on the issue, and I've read trial transcripts where the arguments were raised. Here is a step-by-step process for what I think is the best way to maximize your chances of either keeping out the interview or winning on appeal. → continue reading...Failure to Register Argumentby: Ryan Scott • May 20, 2025 • no comments Assume a car is pulled over for a traffic stop on August 1st. It turns out the driver was supposed to register as a sex offender on January 1st, but he had not. When taking him into custody, the police find a baggie of cocaine. He is subsequently charged with both crimes in a single indictment. I previously wrote a blog post -- and a demurrer, available upon request -- arguing that the indictment should be dismissed because the counts are improperly joined. The "failure to register" did not occur during the traffic stop. It occurred seven months earlier. For that reason, the two crimes are not from the same criminal episode. The two crimes are not part of a common scheme or plan. They are not same or similar. Because the improper joinder is plain on the face of the indictment and regardless of any joinder language in the indictment, the proper vehicle is a demurrer, and the proper remedy dismissal. But that's not why I'm writing this post. Rather, this post is based on the news that the Oregon Supreme Court has granted review to a case with the following issues:
The Court of Appeals' opinion is State of Oregon v. Edwardo Luis Ribas, 333 Or App 789, 554 P3d 280 (2024) (A178917) (S071443) (on review from the Linn County Circuit Court) Technically, not the same legal issues as the demurrer described above, but the two are highly interrelated. Next 20 Articles Case Reviews
Oregon Court of Appeals, May 29th, 2025by: Rankin Johnson EVIDENCE - Other bad acts MERGER - Lesser-included offenses EVIDENCE - Toolmarks in firearms BIAS CRIMES - Sufficiency SENTENCING - Disproportionality ATTEMPTS - Relation to completed offense MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL - Menacing Oregon Court of Appeals, May 21st, 2025by: Rankin Johnson MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL - Finality SENTENCING - Compensatory fine CLOSING ARGUMENT - Improper argument by prosecutor MENS REA - Sufficiency MOTIONS FOR JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL - Value Oregon Court of Appeals, May 14th, 2025by: Rankin Johnson SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE - Recanting victim _________________________ |
RECENT LOD UPDATES________________________________________________ |
