From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Fair

Oregon Court of Appeals
Dec 16, 1998
972 P.2d 907 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)

Opinion

94-10-37301; CA A90430

Submitted on remand May 28, 1998 Reversed and Remanded with instructions December 16, 1998

On remand from the Oregon Supreme Court. 326 Or. 485, 953 P.2d 383 (1998).

Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County.

William J. Keys, Judge.

Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, and Jesse Wm. Barton, Deputy Public Defender, for appellant.

Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General, and Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Before De Muniz, Presiding Judge, and Deits, Chief Judge, and Haselton, Judge.



Defendant was convicted of racketeering under the Oregon Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (ORICO). ORS 166.715 et seq. We reversed, holding that defendant's demurrer to the indictment should have been allowed because the indictment failed to spell out the relationship between the various alleged predicate offenses of the ORICO violation. State v. Fair, 145 Or. App. 96, 929 P.2d 1012 (1996). The Supreme Court reversed, holding that an indictment is generally sufficient to withstand a demurrer if it tracks the pertinent wording of the statute defining the crime. State v. Fair, 326 Or. 485, 490, 953 P.2d 383 (1998). The court remanded the case, and we again hold that defendant's demurrer should have been allowed.

In addition to the challenge to the relationship of the predicate offenses, defendant also demurred to the indictment on the ground that it impermissibly charged juvenile adjudications as predicates. In State v. Harris, 157 Or. App. 119, ___ P.2d ___ (1998), we held that ORS 419A.190 bars prosecution of an ORICO offense on the basis of a defendant's juvenile proceedings. Here, the state previously brought juvenile court proceedings against defendant for all the alleged predicate offenses. Defendant's demurrer should have been allowed.

The predicate offenses were Unauthorized Use of a Vehicle; Delivery of a Controlled Substance; Possession of a Controlled Substance; Attempted Murder and Attempted Assault in the First Degree.

Reversed and remanded with instructions to allow demurrer.


Summaries of

State v. Fair

Oregon Court of Appeals
Dec 16, 1998
972 P.2d 907 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)
Case details for

State v. Fair

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. DAVID WENDELL FAIR, JR., Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Dec 16, 1998

Citations

972 P.2d 907 (Or. Ct. App. 1998)
972 P.2d 907