State v. Hoygaard

Defendant appeals her conviction for hunting with the aid of a light. After trial to the court, the trial judge found that defendant had participated in gutting and dressing a deer after it had been hunted and killed with the aid of a light and therefore found her guilty. We reverse.

Defendant was convicted of violating ORS 498.142(1):

“Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, no person shall hunt wildlife with the aid of any artificial light.”

ORS 496.004 provides that:

“(8) ‘Hunt’ means to take or attempt to take any wildlife by means involving the use of a weapon or with the…