State v. Klutke

6 Citing cases

  1. State v. Garrett

    281 Or. 281 (Or. 1978)   Cited 6 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In State v. Garrett, 281 Or. 281, 574 P.2d 639 (1978), the court interpreted the statutory presumption of identity of person from identity of name. As in this case, the only evidence linking the defendant to the crime charged was his name.

    "(25) Identity of person from identity of name." The evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the state, State v. Klutke, 245 Or. 302, 421 P.2d 956 (1966), reveals the following: Five emaciated dogs were found at the dead-end of a short country road, each tied to a separate doghouse.

  2. State v. Gwyther

    479 P.2d 248 (Or. Ct. App. 1971)   Cited 8 times

    The resolution of such a conflict is not a function of appellate courts, but, rather, of the trier of the fact — in this case the jury. State v. Klutke, 245 Or. 302, 421 P.2d 956 (1966). Affirmed.

  3. State v. Laurel

    4 Or. App. 122 (Or. Ct. App. 1970)   Cited 3 times

    In considering a motion for judgment of acquittal we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the state. State v. Klutke, 245 Or. 302, 421 P.2d 956 (1966); State v. Shipman, 2 Or. App. 359, 468 P.2d 921 (1970); State v. Livingston, 2 Or. App. 587, 469 P.2d 632 (1970). The problem here presented concerns first the right of a landowner or occupant to act in defense of his property, and second of his person.

  4. State v. Monteith

    4 Or. App. 90 (Or. Ct. App. 1970)   Cited 9 times
    In State v. Monteith, 4 Or. App. 90, 477 P.2d 224 (1970), the affiant stated he had purchased hashish on January 25, and also on February 6 had observed hashish and apparatus for smoking hashish and marijuana on the premises.

    In passing upon the denial of these motions, this court should view the evidence in the light most favorable to the state. State v. Klutke, 245 Or. 302, 303, 421 P.2d 956 (1966); State v. Livingston, 2 Or. App. 587, 589, 469 P.2d 632 (1970); State v. Shipman, 2 Or. App. 359, 468 P.2d 921 (1970). Defendant in his reply brief refers to his statement to Officer Lilly, "Well, what about my coat? It is cold outside."

  5. State v. Jarvi

    474 P.2d 363 (Or. Ct. App. 1970)   Cited 5 times

    In reviewing the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal, this court should view the evidence in the light most favorable to the state. State v. Klutke, 245 Or. 302, 303, 421 P.2d 956 (1966); State v. Fichter, 226 Or. 526, 527, 360 P.2d 278 (1961). There was ample evidence to support the trial court's finding that defendant was guilty of manslaughter.

  6. State v. Shipman

    468 P.2d 921 (Or. Ct. App. 1970)   Cited 11 times

    In passing upon the denial of a judgment of acquittal, an appellate court should consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, and should sustain the verdict if there is any substantial evidence to support the verdict. State v. Nipper, 1 Or. App. 540, 464 P.2d 835 (1970); State v. Klutke, 245 Or. 302, 303, 421 P.2d 956 (1966); State v. Fichter, 226 Or. 526, 527, 360 P.2d 278, 279 (1961). We find that it was not error for the trial court to overrule the motion for judgment of acquittal.