Oregon Appellate Court, December 2, 2020
From OCDLA Library of Defense
< Blog:Case Reviews(Difference between revisions)
by: Rankin Johnson • December 4, 2020 • no comments
(Created page with " <summary hidden> FAPA AND STALKING ORDERS - Reasonable apprehension DUII - Ignition interlock device SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Conduct constituting a search RESTITUTION - Good cau...") |
m |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<summary hidden> | <summary hidden> | ||
| − | + | PRESERVATION - Invited error | |
| − | + | UNLAWFUL USE OF A WEAPON - Mens rea | |
| − | SEARCH AND SEIZURE - | + | SEARCH AND SEIZURE - No-trespassing signs |
| − | + | SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Expansion of stop | |
| + | FAPA AND STALKING ORDERS - Timing of hearing | ||
| + | |||
</summary> | </summary> | ||
| Line 14: | Line 16: | ||
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A171497 State v. McKerrall] 307 Or App 682 (December 2, 2020) (Armstrong) (Yamhill County, Wiles) | [https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A171497 State v. McKerrall] 307 Or App 682 (December 2, 2020) (Armstrong) (Yamhill County, Wiles) | ||
| − | '''UNLAWFUL USE OF A WEAPON - | + | '''UNLAWFUL USE OF A WEAPON - Mens rea''' |
Shooting one person did not constitute UUW as to another person, because there was insufficient evidence to prove intent to use the firearm against the other person. Reversed. | Shooting one person did not constitute UUW as to another person, because there was insufficient evidence to prove intent to use the firearm against the other person. Reversed. | ||
| Line 20: | Line 22: | ||
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A167369 State v. Garibay] 307 Or App 722 (December 2, 2020) (Aoyagi) (Marion County, Prall) | [https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A167369 State v. Garibay] 307 Or App 722 (December 2, 2020) (Aoyagi) (Marion County, Prall) | ||
| − | ''' | + | '''SEARCH AND SEIZURE - No-trespassing signs''' |
| − | + | No-trespassing sign on gate in front of abandoned house did not prohibit visiting a neighboring house through neighboring latched gate, notwithstanding that both gates were in the same fence. Reversed on state's appeal. | |
[https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A171391 State v. Faught] 307 Or App 733 (December 2, 2020) (Powers) (Lane County, Holland) | [https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A171391 State v. Faught] 307 Or App 733 (December 2, 2020) (Powers) (Lane County, Holland) | ||
| − | ''' | + | '''SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Expansion of stop''' |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | ''' | + | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | '' | + | Officer's skepticism regarding defendant's four-year-old consular ID, which had defendant's picture on it, was not a basis to seek consent to search defendant for evidence of identity during traffic stop. Reversed. |
| − | + | [https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A170733 State v. Ruiz-Espinoza] 307 Or App 743 (December 2, 2020) (Hadlock) (Lane County, Mertenk) | |
| − | + | '''CIVIL COMMITMENT - Timing of hearing''' | |
| − | + | When respondent was held for five judicial days without a hearing, trial court erred by holding a hearing and issuing a commitment order. Reversed. | |
| − | + | The court explained that a series of holds, even with new case numbers as in this case, does not affect the requirement that a hearing be held before five days of confinement. | |
| − | [https://link.ocdla.org/soll/ | + | [https://link.ocdla.org/soll/A171694 State v. M.Z.] 307 Or App 755 (December 2, 2020) (Per curiam) (Benton County, Williams) |
| + | {{wl-publish: 2020-12-04 11:55:08 -0800 | Rankinjohnsonpdx@gmail.com:Rankin Johnson }} | ||
Latest revision as of 17:12, December 5, 2020
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
PRESERVATION - Invited error
Trial counsel's express waiver of restitution objection precluded plain-error review. Affirmed.
State v. McKerrall 307 Or App 682 (December 2, 2020) (Armstrong) (Yamhill County, Wiles)
UNLAWFUL USE OF A WEAPON - Mens rea
Shooting one person did not constitute UUW as to another person, because there was insufficient evidence to prove intent to use the firearm against the other person. Reversed.
State v. Garibay 307 Or App 722 (December 2, 2020) (Aoyagi) (Marion County, Prall)
SEARCH AND SEIZURE - No-trespassing signs
No-trespassing sign on gate in front of abandoned house did not prohibit visiting a neighboring house through neighboring latched gate, notwithstanding that both gates were in the same fence. Reversed on state's appeal.
State v. Faught 307 Or App 733 (December 2, 2020) (Powers) (Lane County, Holland)
SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Expansion of stop
Officer's skepticism regarding defendant's four-year-old consular ID, which had defendant's picture on it, was not a basis to seek consent to search defendant for evidence of identity during traffic stop. Reversed.
State v. Ruiz-Espinoza 307 Or App 743 (December 2, 2020) (Hadlock) (Lane County, Mertenk)
CIVIL COMMITMENT - Timing of hearing
When respondent was held for five judicial days without a hearing, trial court erred by holding a hearing and issuing a commitment order. Reversed.
The court explained that a series of holds, even with new case numbers as in this case, does not affect the requirement that a hearing be held before five days of confinement.
State v. M.Z. 307 Or App 755 (December 2, 2020) (Per curiam) (Benton County, Williams)
