Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Rodriguez

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 19, 2007No. 04065087C; A126339Published

1DissentSercombe, J.

The majority’s construction of Oregon Laws 2003, chapter 346, robs the statute of its plain meaning through the guise of creating ambiguity from wordplay. The license revocation sanction only applies to a person “whose third [DUII misdemeanor] conviction * * * occurs on or after” January 1, 2004. Or Laws 2003, ch 346, § 4. The majority reads this limitation to include the exact opposite — that the sanction applies to a person whose third DUII misdemeanor conviction occurs before January 1, 2004. That result is reached through a misapplication of the statutory construction principles set out…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Calhoun v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1980
  3. Owens v. Motor Vehicles DivisionOregon Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Steele v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. Godfrey v. Fred Meyer StoresCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

6 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