Legal Opinion

State v. Smith

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 20, 1998No. 95-1087; CA A94293PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaselton, J.

Defendant appeals his conviction of escape in the second degree. ORS 162.155. He asserts that the trial court erred in excluding evidence of “partial responsibility” under ORS 161.300 on the ground that defendant was charged with “knowingly” escaping. We conclude that the exclusion of that evidence was erroneous and that that error was not harmless. Consequently, we reverse and remand for new trial.

Defendant had been an inmate at South Fork Forest Camp. The camp is a minimum security facility bounded by an imaginary perimeter that is marked with orange signs reading, “Camp limits.” It is…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Planned Parenthood Ass'n v. Department of Human ResourcesOregon Supreme Court · 1984
  4. State v. WebbOregon Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State v. OlmsteadOregon Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  2. State v. NEBERTCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  3. State v. GallegosCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  4. State v. HittleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000

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

Powered by the Exa API