Legal Opinion

State v. Hund

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 30, 1985No. 8406-1159 m 8407-1625 m CA A34028 (Control) A34774 A34775PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGillette, P. J.

Defendants appeal their convictions for disorderly conduct resulting from their efforts to disrupt Willamette Industries’ logging activities in the Pyramid Creek area of eastern Linn County. They assert that the trial court erred by refusing to admit evidence on defendants’ choice of evils defense and that it should have sua sponte granted a judgment of acquittal because there was no evidence that defendants intended to cause “public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm” by their actions. ORS 166.025(1) (emphasis supplied). We affirm.

Defendants are enviromental activitists who oppose logging the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  2. State v. WagnerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. MilesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  2. State v. WillyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  3. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
  4. State v. SilverCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
  5. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API