From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Curl

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 19, 1983
670 P.2d 1058 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

3829 M; CA A28638

Argued and submitted October 10, 1983

Reversed and remanded for trial October 19, 1983

Appeal from District Court, Umatilla County.

James M. Monce, Judge.

Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, Salem.

No appearance for respondent.

Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for trial.


The trial court's conclusions in this driving under the influence of intoxicants case that (1) a prosecutor's mistake was "gross" negligence and (2) that mistake, which led to a mistrial, required dismissal of this case on prior jeopardy grounds are in error. The district attorney's error was simple negligence, at most. Even if it were gross negligence, however, that would not create a prior jeopardy problem. See State v. Kennedy, 295 Or. 260, 616 P.2d 1316 (1983).

Reversed and remanded for trial.


Summaries of

State v. Curl

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 19, 1983
670 P.2d 1058 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

State v. Curl

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. RICHARD LEONARD CURL, Respondent

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 19, 1983

Citations

670 P.2d 1058 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)
670 P.2d 1058

Citing Cases

State v. Mays

Negligent error, "gross" or otherwise, is not enough.' State v. Kennedy, 295 Or at 273 (footnote and some…

State v. Kimsey

" State v. Kennedy, 295 Or. at 273 (footnote and some internal quotation marks omitted). See also State v.…