Legal Opinion

State v. Depeche

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 13, 2011No. 070833740; A138304PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for one count of felony failure to report as a sex offender, ORS 181.599 (2005), 1 assigning error to the trial court’s denial of his motion for a judgment of acquittal. He argues that the evidence is insufficient to prove that he committed the offense because he attempted to make a timely report and was prepared to comply with all of the statutory requirements for reporting, but his report was refused. As explained below, we agree with defendant that his statutory obligation to report was satisfied and, accordingly, reverse.

The relevant facts are…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Vsetecka v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Faverty v. McDonald's Restaurants of Oregon, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  3. Hale v. KlempCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  4. State v. NollenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  5. State v. DepecheCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. DepecheCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. Roberts v. Oregon Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  3. State v. ChandlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
  4. State v. ReigardCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API