From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Jones

Oregon Court of Appeals
Nov 30, 1988
764 P.2d 978 (Or. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

M511760; CA A47590

Argued and submitted September 30, 1988

Affirmed November 30, 1988

Appeal from the District Court, Multnomah County, Charles B. Guinasso, Judge.

Henry L. Silberblatt, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.

Leslie Jo Westphal, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Warden, Presiding Judge, and Graber and Riggs, Judges.


RIGGS, J.

Affirmed.


Defendant appeals his conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants. ORS 813.010. He argues that he should not have been retried a third time for the same offense, because there was prosecutorial misconduct. We affirm.

At the first trial, during the prosecutor's direct examination of the arresting police officer, the witness mentioned that defendant refused to perform field sobriety tests. The court granted a mistrial, after finding that the deputy district attorney did not intend to elicit that response to the question asked. The case was set for retrial. At the second trial, during the direct examination of the same witness, a different prosecutor asked if the witness was present when defendant refused to take field sobriety tests. The court granted a mistrial after it found that the question was an inadvertent reference to the field sobriety test. The case was again set for retrial. Defendant was convicted at the third trial.

On balance, we are persuaded, as were the trial judges, that the statements by the prosecutors were inadvertent. As such, there was no prosecutorial misconduct that would bar further prosecution. State v. Kennedy, 295 Or. 260, 666 P.2d 1316 (1983); State v. King, 84 Or. App. 165, 180, 733 P.2d 472, rev den 303 Or. 455 (1987).

We need not address defendant's second assignment of error, because he did not raise it at trial. State v. Mathews, 22 Or. App. 489, 490, 539 P.2d 1129, on reconsideration 23 Or. App. 162, 541 P.2d 831 (1975).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Jones

Oregon Court of Appeals
Nov 30, 1988
764 P.2d 978 (Or. Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

State v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. BRIAN NEAL JONES, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Nov 30, 1988

Citations

764 P.2d 978 (Or. Ct. App. 1988)
764 P.2d 978

Citing Cases

State v. Stuber

State v. Ginocchio (1987), 38 Ohio App.3d 105, 106, citing State v. Tripodo (1977), 50 Ohio St.2d 124.State…