State v. Sweet
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.
Defendant appeals his conviction for driving with a suspended license. ORS 811.182. His sole contention is that the trial court erred in not giving his requested instruction on the statutory defense of necessity. ORS 811.180(l)(a). The instruction should have been given. We reverse.
The state did not appear; therefore, we set out the facts as presented by defendant. See State Dept. of Trans. v. Scott, 59 Or App 25, 28, n 2, 650 P2d 158 (1982). Defendant’s employer asked him to drive a truck loaded with lumber from Mt. Vernon, to Mitchell, a distance of 63 miles. Defendant’s license was…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State v. ButtreyOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. BrownOregon Supreme Court · 1988
- State v. HaleyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
- STATE THROUGH DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
- State v. ClickOregon Supreme Court · 1988
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. ClowdusCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
- State v. ClowdusCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023