Oregon Appellate Court, June 26, 2019
by: Rankin Johnson • July 7, 2019 • no comments
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<summary hidden> | <summary hidden> | ||
SENTENCING - Money judgment in connection with prison term | SENTENCING - Money judgment in connection with prison term | ||
| + | EVIDENCE - Homeowner's exception to ban on surreptitious recording | ||
| + | JUVENILE DELINQUENCY - Merger | ||
| + | SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Probable cause | ||
</summary> | </summary> | ||
'''Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA''' | '''Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA''' | ||
| Line 16: | Line 19: | ||
Defendant was accused of sex offenses against his niece-in-law. She stayed with him sometimes and had a room in his house. She used an iPhone that did not have an active subscription to record a conversation with him, and that conversation was offered in evidence against him. | Defendant was accused of sex offenses against his niece-in-law. She stayed with him sometimes and had a room in his house. She used an iPhone that did not have an active subscription to record a conversation with him, and that conversation was offered in evidence against him. | ||
| − | + | By statute, such recordings are inadmissible unless made by "subscribers or their families." 'Subscribers,' the court held, meant subscribers to telecommunications and radio services regardless of whether those services are used to obtain the recording. | |
| − | + | The Court of Appeals also held that a detective's testimony about interviewing child-witnesses was not scientific evidence requiring a foundation. | |
| − | + | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/24294/download#page=1&zoom=auto State v. Evensen] 298 Or App 294 (June 26, 2019) (Hadlock) (Josephine County, Wolke) | |
| − | + | '''JUVENILE DELINQUENCY - Merger''' | |
| − | + | Juvenile court erred by failing to merge delinquency dispositions. Reversed and remanded. | |
| − | + | The Court of Appeals explained that criminal merger analysis applied to juvenile-delinquency proceedings. | |
| − | + | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/24292/download#page=1&zoom=auto State v. K.R.S.] 298 Or App 318 (June 26, 2019) (Hadlock) (Yamhill County, Wiles) | |
| − | + | '''SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Probable cause''' | |
| − | ' | + | Defendant's presence in a parking lot near a Goodwill donation trailer where illegal dumping had occurred in the past was not probable cause to stop. Reversed and remanded. |
| − | + | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/24290/download#page=1&zoom=auto State v. Semore] 298 Or App 341 (June 26, 2019) (Powers) (Washington County, Sims) | |
| − | + | {{wl-publish: 2019-07-07 14:30:25 -0700 | Rankinjohnsonpdx@gmail.com:Rankin Johnson IV }} | |
| − | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/ | + | |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | ||
Latest revision as of 14:30, July 8, 2019
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
SENTENCING - Money judgment in connection with prison term
Trial court did not plainly err in imposing financial obligations that were enforceable when the defendant was in prison without finding a present ability to pay; the Court of Appeals presumes that the clerk will act lawfully in enforcing monetary obligation. Affirmed.
State v. Saunders 298 Or App 291 (June 26, 2019) (Ortega) (Multnomah County, Wittmayer)
EVIDENCE - Homeowner's exception to ban on surreptitious recording
Statute permitting 'subscribers' surreptitiously to record conversations in their homes and rendering such recordings admissible applied to the recording in this case. Affirmed.
Defendant was accused of sex offenses against his niece-in-law. She stayed with him sometimes and had a room in his house. She used an iPhone that did not have an active subscription to record a conversation with him, and that conversation was offered in evidence against him.
By statute, such recordings are inadmissible unless made by "subscribers or their families." 'Subscribers,' the court held, meant subscribers to telecommunications and radio services regardless of whether those services are used to obtain the recording.
The Court of Appeals also held that a detective's testimony about interviewing child-witnesses was not scientific evidence requiring a foundation.
State v. Evensen 298 Or App 294 (June 26, 2019) (Hadlock) (Josephine County, Wolke)
JUVENILE DELINQUENCY - Merger
Juvenile court erred by failing to merge delinquency dispositions. Reversed and remanded.
The Court of Appeals explained that criminal merger analysis applied to juvenile-delinquency proceedings.
State v. K.R.S. 298 Or App 318 (June 26, 2019) (Hadlock) (Yamhill County, Wiles)
SEARCH AND SEIZURE - Probable cause
Defendant's presence in a parking lot near a Goodwill donation trailer where illegal dumping had occurred in the past was not probable cause to stop. Reversed and remanded.
State v. Semore 298 Or App 341 (June 26, 2019) (Powers) (Washington County, Sims)
