History
  • No items yet
midpage
337 P.3d 186
Or. Ct. App.
2014
Read the full case

Background

  • Defendant convicted after a bench trial of multiple offenses arising from incidents with his girlfriend, the victim.
  • Defendant appeals challenging witness tampering and second-degree domestic-violence assault, plus sentence.
  • For witness tampering, defendant allegedly induced the victim to be absent from an official proceeding; the victim was not shown to have been summoned for a grand jury.
  • The trial court and defense counsel discussed a general judgment of acquittal motion, but the record shows no specific theory preserving insufficiency on witness tampering.
  • The court found preservation deficient and declined to correct plain error without timely preservation; it noted the state could have remedied the error if raised.
  • As to second-degree assault, the record shows defendant pressed a lit cigarette against the victim’s cheek, producing a scar and blister months later; issue concerns whether this could constitute a dangerous weapon causing serious injury.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Preservation and plain-error review for witness tampering Duncan Duncan contends the evidence was insufficient No preservation; not plain error to correct
Sufficiency of evidence for second-degree assault as domestic violence Duncan Duncan argues no substantial risk of serious injury No plain error; record supports verdict under Glazier standard

Key Cases Cited

  • State v. Barboe, 253 Or App 367 (2012) (evidence review when convicting on appeal; standard on preserved issues)
  • State v. Pervish, 202 Or App 442 (2005) (tampering requires post-subpoena proof; reversal/flat error context)
  • State v. Reynolds, 250 Or App 516 (2012) (exercise discretion to correct unpreserved error in limited circumstances)
  • State v. Paragon, 195 Or App 265 (2004) (motion for judgment of acquittal must state specific theory)
  • State v. Schodrow, 187 Or App 224 (2003) (general motion preserves no theory of insufficiency)
  • State v. Hitz, 307 Or 183 (1988) (preservation to ensure fairness and response opportunity)
  • Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc., 312 Or 376 (1991) (ends of justice and preservation in unpreserved error)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Campbell
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Date Published: Oct 8, 2014
Citations: 337 P.3d 186; 2014 Ore. App. LEXIS 1357; 266 Or. App. 116; 10C49012; A149727
Docket Number: 10C49012; A149727
Court Abbreviation: Or. Ct. App.
Log In
    State v. Campbell, 337 P.3d 186