Legal Opinion

State v. Holcomb

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 7, 2011No. CF090151; A143619PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrewer, C. J.

Defendant, who was convicted of first-degree burglary after a bench trial, ORS 164.225, argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal on that charge. As explained below, we affirm.

We review the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal to determine whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, a rational factfinder could have inferred from the evidence the essential elements of first-degree burglary. State v. Casey, 346 Or 54, 56, 203 P3d 202 (2009).

Defendant was charged with first-degree burglary on the theory that he aided…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. BrakeOregon Supreme Court · 1921
  2. State v. CaseyOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State Ex Rel. Juvenile Department v. HollowayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
  4. State v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  5. State v. BooneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. BarboeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  2. State v. HernandezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  3. State v. McLeodCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API