Case Reviews
- Go here to see a list of:
___________________________________________________________________
Oregon Supreme Court 03-04-10
by: Abassos • March 3, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Kidnapping - Asportation
This case provides the counterbalance to Wolleat and Zweigart, recent S.Ct. cases that stand for the proposition that moving somebody around in their home is not kidnapping if it is incidental to another crime like Murder or Assault. Or, as the S.Ct. today notes:
Those cases demonstrate that, when the only evidence of a defendant's intent is physical movement of the victim, a reasonable juror may only infer intent to interfere substantially with a victim's freedom of movement if there is 'evidence that the defendant moved the victim a substantial distance."
In today's case, however, there was evidence of defendant's intent to interfere substantially with freedom of movement. Crazy ex-boyfriend grabs victim as she's walking out her door, pushes her back in and into her bedroom, where he repeatedly prevents her from escaping or calling for help by physically restraining her, taking her cell phone, stifling her screams and choking her when she attempted to escape. In fact, the whole point seemed to be to hold her hostage while he told her that he couldn't live without her. Thus, there was evidence from which a trier of fact could have found that defendant's acts were more than just incidental to assault and menacing. State v. Mejia
Oregon Court of Appeals 03-03-10
by: Abassos • March 2, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Stop - Reasonable Suspicion
- Merger - Assault I/Assault II
- Boyd Delivery - Jury Instruction
- Right to Counsel - Proper Request
- Reasonable Suspicion - Dissipation
- Preservation - Plain Error
- Right to Remain Silent
- Theft - Multiple items Merge
- False Information - Sufficiency
- Prior Bad Acts
- Merger - Theft
U.S. Supreme Court 02-24-10
by: Abassos • February 23, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Miranda - Modified Instructions
* Right to Attorney - Break in Custody
→ read the full summaries...Oregon Court of Appeals 02-17-10
by: Abassos • February 16, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Sentencing - Disproportionality
- Felony Elude/Resisting Arrest - Indian Trial Officers
- Prosecutorial Comments on Right to Remain Silent
- Dependency - Relinquishment
Oregon Supreme Court 02-16-10
by: Abassos • February 15, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- BAC is Ordinarily an Exigent Circumstance
- Consent Obtained During an Extended Traffic Stop is Invalid
I picked a bad week to go on vacation. Nothing from the Supremes for a couple months and then, bam, two big rulings. They overturned Machuca, ruling that dissipation of alcohol is almost always an exigent circumstance and they upheld Rodgers and Kirkeby, ruling that consent to search which is obtained by extending a traffic stop is the fruit of an unconstitutional seizure unless there is separate reasonable suspicion to support the extended portion of the stop.
Oregon Court of Appeals 02-10-10
by: Abassos • February 9, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases: Giving False Info to a Police Officer - Mental State
Sorry about the delay. Just back from vacation.
Only one appellate case last week and it was a state's concession on settled law:
To be convicted of False Info, the State must prove that the defendant knew the officer was requesting the information for the purpose of issuing a citation. See State v. Jaha, 118 Or App 497 (1993). State v. Smith
Oregon Supreme Court 02-04-10
by: Abassos • February 3, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Parole Board May Impose Sex Offender Conditions If Risk of Future Sex Offenses
Two collaterally criminal cases from the Supremes this week: a parole case and a proposed ballot measure.
The particulars of the initiative case have to do with wording of the title and summary. That doesn't matter so much as the substance of the certified initiative: it would modify the sentencing guidelines to make them "advisory only". A departure up or down could be accomplished without a substantial or compelling reason. Berman v. Kroger
The parole board is allowed to impose sex offender conditions on an offender who is not on parole for a sex offense. Even if the offender has never been convicted of a sex offense. For example, Mr. Weems was not on parole for a sex crime and did not have any sex convictions. But he had an arrest for Sodomy where the charges were dismissed and a Sex Abuse case that was pled to Menacing. The board need only find that there is a risk of future sex offenses to impose the sex offender conditions. Here, there was adequate evidence of such a risk based on the arrest record. This was the same finding the Appellate Court made - so the law hasn't changed. But now the S.Ct. has issued the final word on the matter. Weems v. Board of Parole
Oregon Court of Appeals 02-03-10
by: Abassos • February 2, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Felon in Possession - Demurrer
- Theft - Mental State
Oregon Court of Appeals 01-27-10
by: Abassos • January 26, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Seizure - Victim
- Due Process - Hearsay unavailability
- Search and Seizure - Exigent Circumstances
- Consent - Illegal Stop
- Miranda - Compelling Circumstances
- Disproportionality/Cruel and Unusual Punishment
- Dependency - Mootness and Jurisdiction
- Delinquency - Knowing and Intelligent Waiver
6 full criminal opinions today as well as a dependency and a delinquency. Several of them good cases for the defense.
Oregon Court of Appeals 01-20-10
by: Abassos • January 19, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Indictment - Demurrer
- Good Time Hearings
- Search and Seizure - Automobile Exception
- Parole - Statutory Exceptions
Three new criminal cases, none of them good for the defense:
Oregon Court of Appeals 01-06-10
by: Abassos • January 5, 2010 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Probable Cause - Drug Dog
- Failure to Appear - 1st vs 2nd degree
- Upward Departure - Vulnerable Victim
- Stalking Protective Order - Free Speech
- Interfering with Public Transportation - Shared Public Use Platforms
Oregon Supreme Court 12-31-09
by: Abassos • December 30, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Privacy interest - closed container - smell
- Privacy interest - closed container - shared
Two bad opinions today from the Oregon Supreme Court on the privacy interests of closed containers:
→ read the full summaries...Oregon Appellate Court 12-30-09
by: Abassos • December 29, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Theft by Selling Stolen Property - Proportionality
- Felon in Possession of a Firearm - Sufficiency Miranda - Compelling Circumstances
- Citation - Commencing Prosecution
- Conditional Relevance - Mandatory Judicial Finding of Requisite Facts
- Preservation - Motion to Suppress
Oregon Appellate Court 12-23-09
by: Abassos • December 22, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Stop - Extension without Reasonable
- Suspicion Reckless Endangering - Person must Exist (Fetus)
Oregon Supreme Court 12-18-09
by: Abassos • December 17, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Prison Appeals Must Be By Certified Mail
Only one case this week from the Supremes and it has to do with filing appeals. Funny story, Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 1.35(4) says that an incarcerated person has filed something on the date he hands it to the place in the prison for outgoing mail. But ORS 19.260(1) says that a petition is filed upon mailing only if it's sent by registered or certified mail. So our protagonist, presumably relying on the rule that he can file an appeal on the 30th day from prison, does exactly that. So sorry, say the Supremes. The rules come from the statutes so the statutes trump. The statutes say the appeal had to be by registered or certified mail if it doesn't get to the court by the 30th day. So the appeal is dismissed as untimely. Oh, and defendant won his appeal at the appellate level. So his win is lost on a technicality. State v. Harding
Oregon Appellate Court 12-16-09
by: Abassos • December 15, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Probable Cause - Failure to Drive Within the Lane
- Mootness - Return of Property (Medical Marijuana)
- For Cause Juror Challenges/Admission of Prior Probation Evidence
- Delinquency - Youth's Best Interest
- Attenuation - Unprompted Offer to Search
- Delivery of Marijuana - A Felony
U.S. Supreme Court 12-10-09
by: Abassos • December 9, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Hindering Prosecution applies to juvenile adjudication proceedings
The Supremes issued only one case today. It says that the Hindering Prosecution statute "applies when an individual interferes with the apprehension of a juvenile who has been found within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court for engaging in conduct punishable as a felony." That is, the HP statute applies to juveniles and it applies to probation violations. In this case, a father bought his son a plane ticket to the Phillipines in order to flee the country after he bombed out of a juvenile probation for Assault III. This is one of those cases where it kind of makes sense for the facts of the case - buying a plane ticket to assist someone in fleeing the country. But the legal rule is really scary. What if juvenile p.o. calls the kid's house and mom tells the p.o. that the kid isn't home. My parents used to do that for me all the time (though to be fair I've never had a p.o.). If the kid is in trouble and on probation for what would have been a felony, mom has now probably committed a felony. Yikes. What about just "harboring" the kid in the home where he lives. All it's missing is the right intent - but ruthless prosecutors sometimes brush aside intent. My really frightening vision is that prosecutors could threaten a Hindering prosecution to gain leverage in an otherwise irrelevant juvenile case. State v. McCullough
Oregon Appellate Court 12-09-09
by: Abassos • December 8, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Statute of Limitations - Prosecution Commencement Date
- Stop - Subjective Belief
- Withdrawal of Guilty Plea - State's Motion
- Search and Seizure - Inventory Search
- Stop - Subjective Belief
- Merger - ID Theft
Oregon Appellate Court 11-25-09
by: Abassos • November 24, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Search and Seizure - Passenger; Attenuation
- Juvenile - Termination Set Aside
- Stop - Extension
- Confrontation - Lab Reports
- Merger - Burglary
- Ice - Judicial Factfinding for Consecutive Sentences
- Sentencing - MaximumsStop: ExtensionRestitution - Future Counseling
One substantive criminal case, one juvenile case and a slew of concessions. The usual OCDLA plug: these summaries are not a substitute for the more thorough OCDLA criminal law newsletter.
Oregon Supreme Court 11-20-09
by: Abassos • November 19, 2009 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- APSO - Corrections Officer
A corrections officer, for purposes of the APSO statute, is a person who is "charged with supervising or controlling individuals confined in a place of incarceration or detention." It does not include parole and probation officers. But it does, as in this case, include a guard at NORCOR, despite the fact that NORCOR is a corporate rather than a governmental entity. State v. Tate
