State v. Reichsfeld
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtRossman, P. J.
Defendant seeks reversal of his conviction for criminal possession of a forgery device, ORS 165.032(l)(b), arguing that the charging statute is unconstitutionally vague under the state and federal constitutions. Because his conduct was squarely within the statute’s prohibition, we conclude that his constitutional attack fails and affirm.
On January 16, 1991, the first day of the Persian Gulf war, defendant and his travel companion purchased and attempted to use two airplane tickets. Because of the war, airport security was heightened and passengers and their luggage were closely examined…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Parker v. LevySupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- State v. KennedyOregon Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. FarrarOregon Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. HenryOregon Supreme Court · 1987
- State v. GravesOregon Supreme Court · 1985
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. Bruce Lincoln ButterfieldCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- State v. Bruce Lincoln ButterfieldCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
- State v. Bruce Lincoln ButterfieldCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994