Legal Opinion

State v. Kral

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 21, 1981No. R 11946, CA A20765PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.

Defendant appeals his conviction of wanton waste of food fish, ORS 509.112, a Class A misdemeanor. He seeks reversal on the grounds that the statute defining the crime is unconstitutionally vague and that his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted.

In his first assignment of error defendant challenges ORS 509.112 as being unconstitutionally vague. He raises this issue for the first time on appeal; it was not urged in the trial court. While appellate courts will generally not consider a constitutional issue raised for the first time on appeal, we have done so in certain…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. O'Neill v. O'NeillOregon Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State v. FloresOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  3. State Highway Commission v. HelliwellOregon Supreme Court · 1961
  4. H.N.M. Enterprises, Inc. v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1980
  5. The Alpha Corp. v. Multnomah Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1948

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Adult & Family Services Division v. BradleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
  2. State v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
  3. State v. ColeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
  4. State v. BennettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  5. State Ex Rel. Adult & Family Services Division v. BradleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API