State v. Maple

Defendant was convicted of burglary in the first degree, ORS 164.225, by burglarizing premises we refer to as the Barton residence. His principal contention on appeal is that the trial court improperly admitted evidence of a “* * * prior felony murder for which the defendant had been charged and acquitted.” Counsel for the defendant has not complied with Rule 6.18① of this court as to this assignment of error, or, for *628that matter, as to the other assignments of error. Nevertheless, because of the nature of the issue, we have considered whether the jury should have been permitted to know that…