State v. Eisenbeisz

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Eisenbeisz

478 P.3d 607, 308 Or. App. 169

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedDecember 23, 2020

DocketA170277

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 478 P.3d 607 (State v. Eisenbeisz) 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. Eisenbeisz, 478 P.3d 607, 308 Or. App. 169 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

Argued and submitted November 12, reversed and remanded December 23, 2020, petition for review denied April 8, 2021 (367 Or 827)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. RICHARD WAYNE EISENBEISZ, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court 18CR06306; A170277 478 P3d 607

Theodore E. Sims, Judge. Stacy M. Du Clos, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. Also on the brief was Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, Office of Public Defense Services. Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. Also on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Kamins, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed and remanded. 170 State v. Eisenbeisz

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for first-degree criminal mistreatment, ORS 163.205, for withholding necessary and adequate care for his three- month-old son, L. The conviction was based on events that we described in State v. Prose, 308 Or App 167, 478 P3d 606(2020), a case decided this date involving his codefen- dant, L’s mother. Defendant raises essentially the same assignments of error that we addressed in Prose, and we reach the same disposition as we did in that case. That is, we reject his challenge to the sufficiency of the state’s proof of the crime, but we reverse and remand on the ground that the court erroneously admitted hearsay testimony about the results of L’s urine test. Id. Reversed and remanded.

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

Argued and submitted November 12, reversed and remanded December 23, 2020, petition for review denied April 8, 2021 (367 Or 827)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. RICHARD WAYNE EISENBEISZ, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court 18CR06306; A170277 478 P3d 607

Theodore E. Sims, Judge. Stacy M. Du Clos, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. Also on the brief was Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, Office of Public Defense Services. Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. Also on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Kamins, Judge. PER CURIAM Reversed and remanded. 170 State v. Eisenbeisz

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for first-degree criminal mistreatment, ORS 163.205, for withholding necessary and adequate care for his three- month-old son, L. The conviction was based on events that we described in State v. Prose, 308 Or App 167, 478 P3d 606(2020), a case decided this date involving his codefen- dant, L’s mother. Defendant raises essentially the same assignments of error that we addressed in Prose, and we reach the same disposition as we did in that case. That is, we reject his challenge to the sufficiency of the state’s proof of the crime, but we reverse and remand on the ground that the court erroneously admitted hearsay testimony about the results of L’s urine test. Id. Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

478 P.3d 607, 308 Or. App. 169, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-eisenbeisz-orctapp-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack