A Book from the Library of Defense
Namespaces
Variants
Actions

Library Collections

Webinars & Podcasts
Motions
Disclaimer

Oregon Appellate Ct - Dec 21, 2016

From OCDLA Library of Defense
Jump to: navigation, search

by: Sara Werboff • December 23, 2016 • no comments


State v. Dickas, 283 Or App 59 (2016) (Sercombe, P.J.)



State v. Grismore, 283 Or App 71 (2016) (Egan, J.)



State v. Valdez, 283 Or App 77 (2016) (Tookey, J.)



DHS v. A.I.W., 283 Or App 89 (2016) (Flynn, J.)



State v. Herrington, 283 Or App 93 (2016) (Shorr, J.)


The court reverses defendant's convictions for first-degree assault with a firearm and UUW with a firearm with instructions to merge the guilty verdicts and enter a single conviction for first-degree assault with a firearm. The court rejects defendant's remaining claims as unpreserved. Defendant shot her domestic partner, T, in the chest. At trial, defendant contended that T was abusive and she had armed herself in self-defense and the gun accidentally discharged in a struggle. Defendant sought to introduce evidence that T had been abusive toward his ex-wife. On appeal, defendant argued that the evidence was relevant to establish a plan by T to commit and get away with acts of violence. However, defendant did not make that argument below, instead arguing it was relevant to show a pattern of behavior. Because defendant raises a qualitatively different ground of admissibility, the claim of error is unpreserved. Defendant also argued that she was entitled to cross-examine T with allegations he had made in a restraining order against his ex-wife. On appeal, defendant invokes the LeClair methodology. However, because she failed to do so below, this claim of error also is unpreserved. Finally, the court concludes that the trial court plainly erred in failing to merge the guilty verdicts for assault and UUW. The court rejects the state's counterargument that defendant invited the error because defendant did not address the issue below and therefore was not instrumental in bringing the error about.

State v. Bond, 283 Or App 101 (2016) (Haselton, S.J.)


Per Curiam - Attorney Fees - Trial Court Plainly Erred in Imposing $634 in Attorney Fees

The court accepts the state's concession that the trial court plainly erred in imposing $634 in attorney fees and exercises its discretion to correct the error in light of the amount of fees ordered, defendant's 50-month prison term, and the lack of evidence of defendant's ability to pay the fees.

State v. Ruiz, 283 Or App 110 (2016) (per curiam)


Per Curiam - Civil Commitment - State Presented Insufficient Evidence to Support Civil Commitment

The court accepts the state's concession that it failed to present legally sufficient evidence to support appellant's involuntary commitment.

State v. M.C.R. 283 Or App 112 (2016) (per curiam)