State v. Buell, 498 P.3d 349

Defendant (Michael Paul Buell), a felon, was involved in a two‑car collision; hospital staff found a Glock in a holster and a glass pipe while preparing him for x‑rays; defendant had attempted to shield the gun.
Police learned the Glock had been reported stolen three days earlier; a surveillance video of that theft did not identify the thief.
A warrant search of defendant’s car uncovered three handguns (including a Springfield later reported stolen), about four pounds of methamphetamine, a scale, packaging materials, and drug‑related text messages on defendant’s phone.
Indictment charged delivery of methamphetamine, felon in possession of a firearm, and two counts of first‑degree theft (for the Glock and the Springfield). The state at times relied on a theft‑by‑receiving theory but the jury was instructed on theft by taking (appropriation).
Defendant moved for judgment of acquittal on the theft counts arguing insufficient evidence of knowledge that the guns were stolen; the jury convicted on all counts. On appeal the court held the evidence insufficient to prove defendant actually knew or believed the guns were stolen and reversed the two theft convictions (remanded for resentencing), otherwise affirming.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence that defendant knew/believed guns were stolen (mental state for theft)	Possession of stolen guns, concealment of Glock, felon status, and drug‑trade context permit inference defendant knew guns were stolen	Possession and concealment are consistent with other explanations (felon status, hospital rules); no particularized evidence of actual knowledge	Reversed theft convictions: evidence insufficient to prove actual knowledge or belief that guns were stolen
Failure to instruct jury on required mental state for theft	State acknowledged omission but argued evidence nonetheless supported knowledge	Omission required reversal if evidence did not support knowledge	Court noted omission would require reversal, but resolved case on insufficiency of evidence so convictions reversed on that basis
Adequacy of evidence for theft by taking (appropriation)	State requested a taking instruction; argued facts could support appropriation	Defendant argued no evidence he appropriated the guns from an owner	Court found no proof of taking; primary defect was lack of proof of defendant’s knowledge the guns were stolen

State v. Smith, 252 Or App 707 (discusses requirement of actual knowledge or belief for theft‑by‑receiving)
State v. Korth, 269 Or App 238 (possession/proximity to stolen property insufficient to prove actual knowledge)
State v. Shipe, 264 Or App 391 (similarly holds actual knowledge not inferable from possession and suspicious circumstances alone)
State v. Pickens, 6 Or App 133 (possession of recently stolen goods not alone proof of guilty knowledge)