State v. Baca, 529 P.3d 242

Defendant Rebecca Baca was charged under ORS 164.775(1) for discarding trash within 100 yards of state waters after deputies found two trash accumulations at a campsite along the South Umpqua River: a loose pile ~20 feet from her tent and multiple full garbage bags on a tarp inside her tented area.
Bodycam video and photos showed both the outside pile and the bagged trash inside the living area; the state relied on both as bases for the charge.
At trial, Baca moved for a judgment of acquittal arguing the bagged trash was placed in receptacles (garbage bags) “provided for the purpose of holding such trash,” an exception in the statute. The trial court denied the motion.
Baca testified she had been bagging existing trash with the intent to later dispose of the bags in her church dumpster. The jury convicted her.
On appeal Baca argued garbage bags qualify as statutory receptacles and therefore the bagged trash could not support a conviction; the state argued a jury question existed whether the bags were abandoned/discarded.
The Court of Appeals held a garbage bag can qualify as a receptacle but a receptacle may itself be discarded; viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, a rational juror could find the bags were discarded and not lawfully provided receptacles, so the conviction was affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a garbage bag can be a "receptacle provided for the purpose of holding such trash" under ORS 164.775(1)	Statute contemplates traditional receptacles (e.g., dumpsters); context disfavors treating temporary bags as the protected receptacle	A garbage bag is a container supplied to hold trash and thus fits the statutory phrase; bagged trash was not discarded	A garbage bag may qualify as a receptacle under the statute
Whether evidence was sufficient to find the bagged trash had been "discarded" (i.e., abandoned) within 100 yards of state waters	Video, photos, and officer testimony support an inference the bags were abandoned; credibility of Baca’s intent for later disposal is for the jury	Baca intended to retain bags for later lawful disposal at her church; no evidence contradicting that intent	Viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the state, a rational juror could find the bags were discarded and not lawfully provided receptacles; sufficiency upheld

State v. H. D. E., 370 Or 579 (Or. 2022) (standard for reviewing denial of judgment of acquittal)
State v. Essex, 215 Or App 527 (Or. App. 2007) (statute punishes discarding objects regardless of other utility)
State v. Bivins, 191 Or App 460 (Or. App. 2004) (permissible inferences versus speculation in sufficiency review)
State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160 (Or. 2009) (text, context, and legislative history framework for statutory interpretation)
Comcast Corp. v. Dept. of Rev., 356 Or 282 (Or. 2014) (plain-meaning step in statutory interpretation)