From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Washington

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 3, 1969
1 Or. App. 96 (Or. Ct. App. 1969)

Opinion


459 P.2d 455 (Or.App. 1969) 1 Or.App. 96 STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. Raymond Elder WASHINGTON, Appellant. Court of Appeals of Oregon. October 3, 1969

[1 Or.App. 101] George Weigum, and Stults, Jayne, Murphy & Anderson, Roseburg, for the petition.

Before SCHWAB, C.J., and LANGTRY, FOLEY, FORT and BRANCHFIELD, JJ.

LANGTRY, Judge.

Our decision in this case reversed the defendant's conviction and returned the cause for a new trial for [1 Or.App. 102] the reason that the prosecution's case had not the requisite proof of Corpus delicti.

Defendant in a Petition for Rehearing calls our attention to ORS 136.605:

'In any criminal action the defendant may, before the presentation of evidence in his defense, move the court for a judgment of acquittal. The court shall grant the motion if the evidence introduced theretofore is such as would not support a verdict against the defendant. The acquittal shall be a bar to another prosecution for the same crime * * *.'

This was an entirely new statute enacted in 1957. We find no opinion directly construing it. A literal application of its terms prevents a case in the posture of the case at bar from being further prosecuted. Inasmuch as defendant offered no evidence, no reason appears why it should not be literally applied; consequently, our former opinion is modified to provide that the indictment shall be dismissed and the defendant discharged from custody. In view of this ruling there is no reason for a rehearing and the motion is denied.


Summaries of

State v. Washington

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 3, 1969
1 Or. App. 96 (Or. Ct. App. 1969)
Case details for

State v. Washington

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RAYMOND ELDER WASHINGTON, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 3, 1969

Citations

1 Or. App. 96 (Or. Ct. App. 1969)
1 Or. App. 96
458 P.2d 694

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Sheriff

See Whittley v. Sheriff, 87 Nev. 614, 491 P.2d 1282 (1971). Appellant erroneously relies on State v.…

State v. Swearengin

This requirement that there be proof of a corpus delicti in addition to a confession has been repeatedly…