State v. Wray

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for, among other things, criminal mischief in the first degree, ORS 164.365. He assigns error to the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal on that charge, contending that there was insufficient evidence that the property he damaged was “used in direct service to the public” within the meaning of ORS íed.SdSUXaXE). We conclude that the evidence was sufficient to establish that defendant damaged property “used in direct service to the public” and, accordingly, affirm.

The relevant facts are few and undisputed. The evidence showed…