Legal Opinion

State v. Camarena-Velasco

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 19, 2006No. MI040140, MI040141; A124602, A124603PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtOrtega, J.

Defendant appeals two convictions for failure to appear in the second degree, ORS 162.195, contending that the trial court should have merged his convictions because they were based on violation of a single release agreement and therefore were based on the same conduct.1 On review for errors of law, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, State v. Barnum, 333 Or 297, 302, 39 P3d 178 (2002), we agree with defendant and, therefore, reverse.

Defendant originally was charged with driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII), ORS 813.010, and recklessly endangering…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. BarnumOregon Supreme Court · 2002
  2. State v. EastmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  3. State v. OttCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. MasonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  2. State v. GrayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  3. State v. UrbinaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  4. State v. Ureno-AlvarezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  5. State v. GrayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API