State v. Orth
This text of 581 P.2d 953 (State v. Orth) 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
Defendant pled guilty to a charge of negligently wounding another. ORS 166.180.1 The district court sentenced defendant to pay a fine of $105 and imposed a 30-day suspended jail sentence and one-year probation. Defendant seeks remand for resentencing claiming that, since no culpable mental state is specified by the statute creating the offense of negligently wounding another, the offense must be a violation under ORS 161.105(2), which provides:
"(2) Notwithstanding any other existing law, and unless a statute enacted after January 1, 1972, otherwise provides, an offense defined by a statute outside the Oregon Criminal Code that requires no culpable mental state constitutes a violation.”
Defendant relies upon State v. Pierre, 30 Or App 81, 566 P2d 534 (1977), where we held that a person who was convicted under ORS 59.0552 could only be sentenced for a violation under ORS 161.635(3),3 because [238]*238no culpable mental state was provided for by the statute.
In the present case, however, the legislature, by using the words "failure to use ordinary care under the circumstances,” clearly intended a culpable mental state.4 ORS 161.105 does not apply.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
581 P.2d 953, 35 Or. App. 235, 1978 Ore. App. LEXIS 2730, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-orth-orctapp-1978.