Legal Opinion

State v. Gensitskiy

Oregon Supreme Court

Decided July 25, 2019No. CC C131060CR; (SC S065317)PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDuncan, J.

*28**265Aggravated identity theft is defined by ORS 165.803, which the legislature enacted to create a new, more serious crime than identity theft as defined by ORS 165.800. The state can charge a defendant with aggravated identity theft by aggregating multiple identity thefts. In this case, the state charged defendant with one count of aggravated identity theft, based on his possession of files containing personal information regarding 27 other persons. Based on that same conduct, the state also charged defendant with 27 counts of identity theft. Defendant pleaded guilty to all the counts, but…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Blockburger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  2. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State v. CloutierOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  5. State v. ParkinsOregon Supreme Court · 2009

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Martinez v. CainOregon Supreme Court · 2020
  2. State v. BartonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  3. State v. PayeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  4. State v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  5. State v. OldhamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019

9 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