State v. Lee
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtDeits, J.
Defendant appeals his conviction for solicitation to commit robbery in the first degree. ORS 161.435. He argues that a letter that was not delivered can support, at most, a conviction for attempted solicitation. We agree.
In July, 1989, defendant, while in jail, wrote letters to an acquaintance who was in the Hillcrest Juvenile Center, outlining plans to rob a store and a residence. The letters were intercepted by Hillcrest personnel and never reached their intended recipient. The first intercepted letter stated:
“I wrote about two weeks ago. I guess you didn’t get it. So, I’ll tell you again.…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. TwittyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
- State v. CottonNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1990
- State v. AndersonOregon Supreme Court · 1965
- Viking Insurance v. PerottiOregon Supreme Court · 1989
3Cited by8 opinions
- State v. AndujarSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 2006
- State v. LopezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- People v. SaephanhCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
- People v. BoyceIllinois Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. EverettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.