Legal Opinion

State v. Fonte

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 26, 2018No. CC 16CR01505 (SC S065012)PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

We begin by setting out the relevant text and providing some background about its origins. We then analyze the text, together with its context and legislative history, to determine whether the legislature intended to punish defendant's conduct as first-degree theft under ORS 164.055 (1)(c). See State v. Gaines , 346 Or. 160, 171-72, 206 P.3d 1042 (2009) (stating interpretation methodology).

I. TEXT

Oregon law defines the crime of theft broadly. ORS 164.015 provides:

**332"A person commits theft when, with intent to deprive another of property or to appropriate property to the person or to a…

Also in this document: Concurring in the judgment.

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State v. CloutierOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  4. State v. GarciaOregon Supreme Court · 1980
  5. State v. WalkerOregon Supreme Court · 2014

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Ludwin Lopez-Aguilar v. William BarrCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
  2. State v. BradyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022
  3. State v. BostwickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022
  4. State v. EllingsenOregon Supreme Court · 2018
  5. State v. MeyerOregon Supreme Court · 2018

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

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

Powered by the Exa API