State v. Daffin

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Daffin

719 P.2d 520, 79 Or. App. 747, 1986 Ore. App. LEXIS 2911

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJune 4, 1986

Docket10-85-00751; CA A36257

StatusPublished

This text of 719 P.2d 520 (State v. Daffin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Daffin, 719 P.2d 520, 79 Or. App. 747, 1986 Ore. App. LEXIS 2911 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was charged in a seven count indictment and was convicted of attempted murder (Count I); theft in the first degree (Count III); recklessly endangering another person (Count IV); theft in the first degree (Count V); unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (Count VI); and possession of a controlled substance, marijuana (Count VII).¹ He contends that the court erred in admitting evidence of criminal activity in which he engaged after the time of the actions which led to the indictment. We conclude that the evidence was relevant and that the court did not err in admitting it.

In his second assignment, defendant contends that the six convictions should have been merged into two convictions. The state concedes that the conviction of Count VI, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, should merge with the conviction of the charge in Count V, which involved theft of the same vehicle. We agree with the state’s concession but disagree with defendant’s other contentions.

Conviction of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (Count VI) vacated; otherwise affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

Defendant was charged in a seven count indictment and was convicted of attempted murder (Count I); theft in the first degree (Count III); recklessly endangering another person (Count IV); theft in the first degree (Count V); unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (Count VI); and possession of a controlled substance, marijuana (Count VII).¹ He contends that the court erred in admitting evidence of criminal activity in which he engaged after the time of the actions which led to the indictment. We conclude that the evidence was relevant and that the court did not err in admitting it.

In his second assignment, defendant contends that the six convictions should have been merged into two convictions. The state concedes that the conviction of Count VI, unauthorized use of a motor vehicle, should merge with the conviction of the charge in Count V, which involved theft of the same vehicle. We agree with the state’s concession but disagree with defendant’s other contentions.

Conviction of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (Count VI) vacated; otherwise affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

719 P.2d 520, 79 Or. App. 747, 1986 Ore. App. LEXIS 2911, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-daffin-orctapp-1986.