From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Halsell

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 25, 1989
781 P.2d 875 (Or. Ct. App. 1989)

Opinion

88-2241A-C-1; CA A50604

Argued and submitted August 25, 1989

Reversed and remanded for new trial October 25, 1989

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County.

L.A. Merryman, Judge.

Steven V. Humber, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.

Robert M. Atkinson, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the briefs were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for new trial.


Defendant appeals his conviction for possession of a controlled substance following a stipulated facts trial to the court, contending that, because the record contains no written waiver of his right to trial by jury, his conviction cannot stand. Defendant is correct. State v. Kendall, 96 Or. App. 735, 773 P.2d 1362, rev den 308 Or. 382 (1989); State v. McDaniel, 96 Or. App. 337, 772 P.2d 951, rev den 308 Or. 382 (1989).

Reversed and remanded for new trial.


Summaries of

State v. Halsell

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 25, 1989
781 P.2d 875 (Or. Ct. App. 1989)
Case details for

State v. Halsell

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. ROGER WAYNE HALSELL, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 25, 1989

Citations

781 P.2d 875 (Or. Ct. App. 1989)
781 P.2d 875

Citing Cases

State v. Miles

He is correct. State v. Halsell, 99 Or. App. 205, 781 P.2d 875 (1989). Defendant also contends that the trial…