S059191A State v. Leistiko, 352 Or. 622

Defendant Leistiko sought reconsideration of our State v. Leistiko decision; petition filed August 27, 2012 and considered October 10, 2012.
We allowed reconsideration, modified the opinion, and adhered to the opinion as modified.
The first issue concerned whether Leistiko had pursued two suppression/jury-unanimity issues in the Court of Appeals and on review.
We clarified that we limited review to the admission of uncharged misconduct evidence and Leistiko pursued only that issue on the merits in this court.
The second issue involved whether admission of evidence of an uncharged rape affected convictions beyond the two rape counts, including other crimes.
On reconsideration we declined to address an alternative argument raised for the first time and clarified footnote language.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Preservation of issues on review	Leistiko raised suppression and unanimity issues in review.	State contends issues not pursued on merit review.	Court clarifies limited review to uncharged misconduct evidence; preserves that the other issues were not pursued on review.
Effect of uncharged rape evidence on other convictions	Uncharged rape evidence affected multiple convictions beyond the two rape counts.	Uncharged evidence only impacted rape convictions; other convictions unaffected.	Court declines to address this alternative argument on reconsideration.

Fleming v. United Services Automobile Assn., 330 Or 62, 996 P.2d 501 (Or. 2000) (arguments raised for the first time on reconsideration are generally not addressed)