State v. Cruz-Gonzelez, 303 P.3d 983

Defendant hit an unattended vehicle in a residential area causing damage to both vehicles.
He drove away for about two minutes and 472 feet before stopping, calling 9-1-1, and returning to the scene to exchange information.
Defendant was charged with failure to perform the duties of a driver when property is damaged under ORS 811.700(1)(b).
At trial, he requested instructions on attempted failure to perform the duties of a driver and on renunciation; the court declined.
The jury found him guilty as charged.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether an attempted failure instruction was proper	Worthington: evidence shows completion, not attempt	Whether two-minute delay constitutes substantial step toward violation	The court erred in issuing no attempted instruction; two-minute delay shows no immediate stop
Whether renunciation instruction was required	No renunciation defense applicable to completed crime	Renunciation should be available as affirmative defense	Renunciation instructions not required to be given; cited as not meriting discussion
What is the correct interpretation of 'immediately stop' under ORS 811.700(1)(b)	Immediate stop occurred if defendant stopped without delay	Two-minute delay could be outside 'immediately'	Evidence shows two-minute delay; not 'immediate'; jury could not find guilt of lesser offense

State v. Worthington, 251 Or App 110 (2012) (review for errors of law)
State v. Taylor, 207 Or App 649 (2006) (jury instructed on defendant's theory of the case; rational basis for instructions)
State v. Baty, 243 Or App 77 (2011) (requirement that an instruction on a lesser-included offense be supported by evidence)
State v. Cunningham, 320 Or 47 (1994) (limitation on giving lesser-included offense instructions)
State v. White, 303 Or 333 (1987) (ORs 136.465 interpretation and evidentiary support for lesser offenses)
State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160 (2009) (statutory interpretation of term 'immediately')