Opinion
A170277
12-23-2020
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Richard Wayne EISENBEISZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Stacy M. Du Clos, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. Also on the brief was Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, Office of Public Defense Services. Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. Also on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General.
Stacy M. Du Clos, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. Also on the brief was Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, Office of Public Defense Services.
Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. Also on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General.
Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Kamins, Judge.
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for first-degree criminal mistreatment, ORS 163.205, for withholding necessary and adequate care for his three-month-old son, L. The conviction was based on events that we described in State v. Prose , 308 Or. App. 167, 478 P3d 606 (2020), a case decided this date involving his codefendant, L's mother. Defendant raises essentially the same assignments of error that we addressed in Prose , and we reach the same disposition as we did in that case. That is, we reject his challenge to the sufficiency of the state's proof of the crime, but we reverse and remand on the ground that the court erroneously admitted hearsay testimony about the results of L's urine test. Id.
Reversed and remanded.