Legal Opinion

State v. Bainbridge

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 2, 2009No. Z1233105; A135756PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, P. J.

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for driving through a safety zone, ORS 811.030, a Class B violation. Before the trial court, defendant argued that the evidence was insufficient to establish the elements of the offense. Defendant reasserts that argument on appeal. We conclude that the evidence was insufficient to prove all of the elements and reverse.

In an appeal from a judgment involving a violation, “the standard of review is the same as for an appeal from a judgment in a proceeding involving a misdemeanor or felony.” ORS 138.057(l)(a). We review challenges to the sufficiency of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Gaona v. BLACKETTEROregon Supreme Court · 2008
  4. State v. ParagonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. AtwoodCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
  2. State v. ChenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  3. State v. GuynnCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  4. State v. AtwoodCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2024
  5. State v. HashooshCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020

1 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