Legal Opinion

State v. Casey

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 19, 2007No. CR030474; A125350PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction after a bench trial for a violation of ORS 166.270(1), which prohibits a felon from possessing a firearm. He assigns error to the trial court’s denial of his motion for a judgment of acquittal. We affirm.

In reviewing a motion for a judgment of acquittal, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the state to determine whether a rational trier of fact could find that the state had proved every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. ORS 136.445; State v. Hall, 327 Or 568, 570, 966 P2d 208 (1998).

On the evening of June 3, 2003,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. HallOregon Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State v. CoriaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979
  3. State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1964
  4. State v. MarshCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
  5. State v. WrisleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. CaseyOregon Supreme Court · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API