State v. Petersen

LINDE, J.,

specially concurring.

Of course the majority is right that when narrow, subconstitutional grounds suffice for a decision, a court should not needlessly pass on a constitutional dispute. But there is an equal risk of misconstruing an important area of statutory law under a mistaken impression that a case poses serious constitutional doubts. I do not share the majority’s conviction that its holding correctly disposes of the statutory issues in this case.

The circuit court’s order, quoted by the majority at 308 Or 636 comprised two separate parts. The first paragraph ordered the sheriff…