Oregon Appellate Court, October 30, 2019

by: Rankin Johnson • November 5, 2019 • no comments

Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA

RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL - Waiver

Defendant's written jury trial waiver did not apply when an amended information dropped the initial charge and added others. Reversed.

The court explained that, although the error was unpreserved, the court was obligated to review and correct an error relating to invalid waiver of jury trial.

State v. Smith 300 Or App 272 (October 30, 2019) (Hadlock) (Marion County, Burton)

SELF-INCRIMINATION - Statements in connection with breath-test refusal

Statements made in connection with breath-test refusal were not admissible. Reversed.

The court declined to reach a second issue, regarding the admissibility of a photocopy of a certified judgment.

State v. Vandruff 300 Or App 281 (October 30, 2019) (Hadlock) (Multnomah County, Ramras)

SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Probable cause

Defendant's false denial that he had seen a wanted person was not the offense of hindering prosecution, and therefore did not provide probable cause that defendant had committed the offense of hindering prosecution. Reversed.

State v. Carpenter 300 Or App 287 (October 30, 2019) (DeVore) (Curry County, Margolis)

SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Probable cause

Lack of a windshield-mounted mirror did not constitute probable cause to stop. Reversed and remanded.

The Court of Appeals explained that any mirror providing a view for 200 feet behind the vehicle complied witht he applicable statute, and that the police officer's subjective, incorrect belief that lack of a windshield-mounted mirror was an offense was not a basis to stop. A remand for further proceedings was necessary because the trial court did not rule on the state's other proffered justifications for the stop.

State v. Lawson 300 Or App 282 (October 30, 2019) (DeVore) (Washington County, Roberts)

SENTENCING - Merger

Indictment need not specify each victim of reckless endangerment. Affirmed.

While intoxicated, defendant caused a car accident. He was charged with one count of reckless endangerment for each person in the accident, but the indictment did not name any of the victims. Defendant pleaded guilty to each count without limitation. In affirming, the Court of Appeals explained that the record did not establish whether each count related to a different person.

State v. Ham 300 Or App 304 (October 30, 2019) (Lagesen) (Multnomah County, Rees)

DEFENDANT'S STATEMENTS - Invocation of right to counsel

Defendant's question "do I need a lawyer" was an equivocal invocation, and police properly asked clarifying questions. Affirmed.