Legal Opinion

State v. Shoemaker

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 21, 1976No. 75-72, CA 5585PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchwab, C. J.

Defendant was arrested when an officer saw him and another person standing next to an automobile with a siphon hose in the fuel tank. The other person fled. Subsequently, one Etcher was arrested as the other person and charged with second-degree theft for siphoning gasoline. At Etcher’s trial, defendant testified that he did not remember or did not know who else was present at the time the gas was being siphoned. Based on that testimony at Etcher’s trial, defendant was later convicted upon trial by jury of the crime of perjury, ORS 162.065. Defendant contends that the trial court erred in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. People v. . DoodyNew York Court of Appeals · 1902
  2. State v. BuckleyOregon Supreme Court · 1889

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. ShoemakerOregon Supreme Court · 1977
  2. State v. PiersallCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API