Oregon Appellate Ct - March 15, 2017

by: Sara Werboff • March 17, 2017 • no comments

The court concludes that any error in amending the indictment on the morning of trial to change burglary with intent to commit assault to burglary with intent to commit coercion was harmless. Before trial, the prosecutor asked the trial court to amend the indictment, contending that she had presented the grand jury with burglary with intent to commit coercion but, due to a scrivener’s error, the indictment incorrectly stated burglary with intent to commit assault. Defendant objected that this was a material amendment to the indictment, however, defendant declined the trial court’s offer of a set-over and said he was prepared to proceed with trial. The court does not decide whether the trial court’s amendment was a material change because, under the unique circumstances of this case, any error was harmless because defendant was not prejudiced by the amendment and because the correct charge had been submitted to the grand jury.

State v. Garcia, 284 Or App 357 (2017) (Devore, J.)

J.V.-B. v. Burns, 284 Or App 366 (2017) (Garrett, J.)

Harbert v. Franke, 284 Or App 374 (2017) (Flynn, J.)

State v. V.T., 284 Or App 383 (2017) (Flynn, J.)

Welsh v. Taylor, 284 Or App 387 (2017) (DeHoog, J.)

State v. Byam, 284 Or App 402 (2017) (Haselton, S.J.)