State v. S.-Q. K. (In re S.-Q. K.)

426 P.3d 258, 294 Or. App. 184
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided September 19, 2018·No. A161045·Published·Cited by 12 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM

*185Appellant has petitioned for reconsideration of our opinion in State v. S.-Q. K. , 292 Or. App. 836, 426 P.3d 659 (2018), requesting that we correct a factual error in the opinion. See ORAP 6.25(1)(a). Appellant asserts that the opinion "erroneously states that youth was adjudicated for riot, ORS 166.015. 292 Or. App. at 837, 426 P.3d 659, et seq. " Although the delinquency petition originally alleged riot, appellant points out that the juvenile court later amended the petition to conform to the evidence and youth was instead adjudicated for conduct that would constitute disorderly conduct in the second degree, ORS 166.025. Appellant requests that we modify our opinion to correct that error.

Appellant is correct. Therefore, we allow reconsideration and modify the opinion to reflect that youth was adjudicated for conduct that would constitute disorderly conduct in the second degree, ORS 166.025 -not riot, ORS 166.015.

*259Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified.

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

State v. S.-Q. K. (In re S.-Q. K.), 426 P.3d 258, 294 Or. App. 184 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).

426 P.3d 258 (State v. S.-Q. K. (In re S.-Q. K.)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Myers
Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2026
State v. C. L. B.
345 Or. App. 335 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2025)
State v. T. J. L.
558 P.3d 855 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2024)
Yeager v. Montgomery
Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2024
Mouton v. Tri-County Metro. Dist.
Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2024
Flanders v. Winco Foods, LLC
Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2024
State v. J. R.
507 P.3d 778 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2022)
State v. H. K. D. S. (A163158)
469 P.3d 770 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2020)
State v. M. A. S.
462 P.3d 284 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2020)