Legal Opinion

State v. Dixon

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 21, 2004No. 01CR0021; A114904PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLinder, J.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of endangering the welfare of a minor by permitting “a person under 18 years of age to enter or remain in a place where unlawful activity involving controlled substances is maintained or conducted,” ORS 163.575(1)(b). The principal issue on appeal is whether, to commit that offense, a defendant must know that the endángered person is a minor. We conclude that the offense requires such knowledge and, further, that there was insufficient evidence in this case for a jury to find that defendant acted with that knowledge. We therefore reverse.

We…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. KingOregon Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Delgado v. SoudersOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  3. State v. BeasonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  4. State v. JahaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
  5. State v. HowleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. ProphetCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022
  2. State v. RutleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  3. State v. AlvaradoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  4. State v. Jimenez-CorreoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API