Oregon Appellate Court, January 29, 2020
by: Rankin Johnson • February 6, 2020 • no comments
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Preservation and making a record
Camping ordinances did not violate constitution. Affirmed.
Defendant was arrested repeatedly for camping in Portland. Before trial, he filed a motion to dismiss, later captioned a demurrer, raising numerous arguments. The Court of Appeals held that he failed to make a factual record showing that there were no homeless shelters available and that his as-applied arguments could not be raised pre-trial.
Ortega, concurring, would have held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits punishing a homeless person for camping when no alternative is available, but agreed that defendant had not made an adequate record.
James, concurring, believed that defendant had raised a proper facial challenge, because defendant's argument applied to a class of people, which James would have rejected on the merits.
State v. Barrett 302 Or App 23 (January 29, 2020) (DeVore, Ortega concurring, James concurring) (Multnomah County, Bushong)
SENTENCING - Comparable convictions
Federal offense of transporting child pornography across state lines is not analogue to Oregon child-pornography offense. Reversed and remanded.
State v. Kirkpatrick 302 Or App 62 (January 29, 2020) (DeVore) (Easterday County, Yamhill)
EVIDENCE - 403 balancing
Video of defendant's interview in jail was admissible. Affirmed.
Defendant argued that only the audio should be admitted, but the audio was poor and the video showed his expressions and gestures.
State v. Boauod 302 Or App 67 (January 29, 2020) (Lagesen) (Beaverton Municipal, Ravelo)
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRAFFIC OFFENSES - Following too closely
Following within six feet at 55-60 MPH at night on wet road supported conviction for following too closely. Affirmed
State v. Guynn 302 Or App 78 (January 29, 2020) (Lagesen) (Yamhill County, Justice)
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Subpoena enforcement
State's appeal. Victim is not a party, such that his failure to appear when subpoenaed is a basis for dismissal. Reversed and remanded.
State v. McCarthy 302 Or App 82 (January 29, 2020) (James) (Marion County, Partridge)
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Subpoena enforcement
State's appeal. Victim is not a party, such that his failure to appear when subpoenaed is a basis for dismissal. Reversed and remanded.
State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (January 29, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Subpoena enforcement
State's appeal. Victim is not a party, such that his failure to appear when subpoenaed is a basis for dismissal. Reversed and remanded.
State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (January 29, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Subpoena enforcement
State's appeal. Victim is not a party, such that his failure to appear when subpoenaed is a basis for dismissal. Reversed and remanded.
State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (January 29, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Subpoena enforcement
State's appeal. Victim is not a party, such that his failure to appear when subpoenaed is a basis for dismissal. Reversed and remanded.
State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (January 29, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Subpoena enforcement
State's appeal. Victim is not a party, such that his failure to appear when subpoenaed is a basis for dismissal. Reversed and remanded.
State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (January 29, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
TRIAL PROCEDURE - Subpoena enforcement
State's appeal. Victim is not a party, such that his failure to appear when subpoenaed is a basis for dismissal. Reversed and remanded.
State v. XXX 302 Or App XXX (January 29, 2020) (XXX) (XXX County, XXX)
