State v. Simons

• Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
• Decided: April 1, 2026
• Docket: A186693
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

No. 260 April 1, 2026 219

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ROBERT EDWARD SIMONS, Defendant-Appellant. Lane County Circuit Court 24VI138333; A186693

Bradley A. Cascagnette, Judge. Submitted March 11, 2026. Robert E. Simons filed the brief pro se. Dan Rayfield, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Interim Deputy Attorney General, and Jonathan N. Schildt, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, Joyce, Judge, and Hellman, Judge. JOYCE, J. Affirmed. 220 State v. Simons

JOYCE, J. Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for a traffic violation. The exact nature of his claim on appeal is somewhat difficult to precisely identify, but it appears that he challenges the sufficiency of evidence to support his con- viction. We affirm. Defendant has not provided a transcript on appeal.1 The appealing party “bears the burden of provid- ing a record sufficient to demonstrate that error occurred.” Ferguson v. Nelson, 216 Or App 541, 549, 174 P3d 620 (2007). Examination of defendant’s claim demonstrates that review of that transcript is necessary to resolve the issues that he raises on appeal. Without the transcript, we are not able to determine whether any error occurred. See Universal Ideas Corp. v. Esty, 84 Or App 541, 544, 734 P2d 408 (1987) (explaining that the court was not able to review an assign- ment of error without a transcript of the proceedings when the appellate arguments did not “turn solely on questions of law”); see also ORS 19.365(5) (“If the record on appeal is not sufficient to allow the appellate court to review an assign- ment of error, the appellate court may decline to review the assignment of error * * *.”). Affirmed.

1 Defendant moved to proceed without a transcript, a motion that the Appellate Commissioner granted. The Commissioner noted that defendant’s notice of appeal sets forth his statement of points relied upon. That statement of points, which consists of a couple of sentences explaining defendant’s view of the traffic stop, is not a substitute for a transcript or other designated record that would allow us to review his claim on appeal.