From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Miller

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 26, 1993
854 P.2d 1007 (Or. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

B924280; CA A76680

Argued and submitted June 3, 1993

Motion to strike state's brief denied; otherwise affirmed June 23, 1993 Reconsideration denied August 18, 1993 Petition for review denied October 26, 1993 ( 318 Or. 26)

Appeal from District Court, Coos County.

Robert E. Jones, Judge.

Sam I. Hochberg, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Ann F. Kelley, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Rossman, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Motion to strike state's brief denied; otherwise affirmed.


Defendant's motion to strike the state's brief is denied. On the merits, defendant raises a constitutional vagueness challenge directed at the traffic infraction of "failure to wear approved headgear." ORS 814.269; ORS 815.050. Assuming, without deciding, that such a challenge is appropriate in a case not involving penal sanctions, we conclude that the laws cited by defendant are not unconstitutionally vague. Defendant's concerns are best addressed to the legislature.

Motion to strike state's brief denied; otherwise affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Miller

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 26, 1993
854 P.2d 1007 (Or. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

State v. Miller

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. GLENN DOUGLAS MILLER, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 26, 1993

Citations

854 P.2d 1007 (Or. Ct. App. 1993)
854 P.2d 1007