State v. Dixon
Court of Appeals of Oregon
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
- State v. KingOregon Supreme Court · 1989
- Delgado v. SoudersOregon Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. BeasonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- State v. JahaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- State v. HowleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. ProphetCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022
- State v. RutleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- State v. AlvaradoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
- State v. Jimenez-CorreoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012