State v. Jenabzadeh

823 P.2d 1040, 111 Or. App. 392, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 381
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedFebruary 12, 1992
Docket9011-36365; CA A68311
StatusPublished

This text of 823 P.2d 1040 (State v. Jenabzadeh) 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. Jenabzadeh, 823 P.2d 1040, 111 Or. App. 392, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 381 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of delivery of a controlled substance as part of a drug cultivation, manufacture or delivery scheme or network. ORS 475.992. He had demurred on the ground that the scheme or network language is unconstitutionally vague. The trial court erroneously overruled his demurrer. State v. Moeller, 105 Or App 434, 806 P2d 130, rev dismissed 312 Or 76, 815 P2d 701 (1991).

Because we dispose of the case on that issue, we need not reach defendant’s other assignment of error.

Reversed and remanded with instructions to dismiss the indictment.

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

Related

State v. Moeller
806 P.2d 130 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1991)
State v. Moeller
815 P.2d 701 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
823 P.2d 1040, 111 Or. App. 392, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jenabzadeh-orctapp-1992.