State v. McColligan
This text of 381 P.3d 1101 (State v. McColligan) 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.
Opinion
In this criminal case, following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of failure to report as a sex offender. On appeal, he contends that the trial court should have entered a judgment of acquittal because there was insufficient evidence to support a conviction.1 See State v. Gonzalez, 188 Or App 430, 431, 71 P3d 573 (2003) (explaining that, in a bench trial, when a defendant argues during closing argument that the state failed to adduce sufficient evidence for conviction, that argument is “the equivalent of a motion for judgment of acquittal”)- The state concedes that, in light of State v. Hiner, 269 Or App 447, 345 P3d 478 (2015), “there was insufficient evidence for the trial court to find defendant guilty of failure to report as a sex offender.” We agree, accept the concession and, accordingly, reverse defendant’s conviction.
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
381 P.3d 1101, 281 Or. App. 375, 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 1151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mccolligan-orctapp-2016.