State v. Davidson, 380 P.3d 963

Defendant (Dennis J. Davidson) was convicted by a jury of two counts of felony public indecency for exposing his genitals and masturbating in public (park incidents).
He had three prior public-indecency convictions (one misdemeanor, two felonies), which triggered ORS 137.719(1) and produced presumptive consecutive life sentences without parole; the trial court found no mitigating grounds and imposed consecutive true-life sentences.
Prior offenses involved exposure near a house porch (woman obtained stalking order), exposure near an elementary school (children present), and exposure in a store parking lot (child present); defendant has a lengthy nonviolent criminal history and diagnoses including traumatic brain injury.
On appeal the Court of Appeals affirmed convictions but held the true-life sentences were unconstitutionally disproportionate as applied; the state and defendant both sought review by the Oregon Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions (rejecting the requested attempt instruction) but held the consecutive life-without-parole sentences were unconstitutionally disproportionate as applied and remanded for resentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Davidson)	Held
Jury instruction — whether court erred by refusing attempt instruction	Attempt instruction unnecessary; conviction supported by evidence	Requested attempt instruction to show lack of intent to be seen; argued insufficiency of intent element	No error: attempt instruction would not have advanced defendant’s theory that he lacked the requisite intent to commit public indecency
As-applied proportionality of true-life sentences under Article I, §16	True-life sentences reviewable; defendant’s extensive recidivism and failure on supervision justify true-life sentences	Life without parole is grossly disproportionate for noncontact public indecency, even for repeat offender	Sentences unconstitutional as applied: consecutive life-without-parole sentences reversed and remanded for resentencing
Reviewability of ORS 137.719 enhanced sentence	(State argued) presumptive true-life sentences are unreviewable under ORS 138.222(2)(a)	Defendant sought review of both conviction and sentence	Rejected (Althouse controls): true-life sentence reviewable on proportionality challenge

State v. Althouse, 359 Or 668 (Oregon Supreme Court) (framework for as-applied proportionality review under ORS 137.719)
State v. Rodriguez/Buck, 347 Or 46 (Oregon Supreme Court) (three-factor disproportionality test)
Tuel v. Gladden, 234 Or 1 (Oregon Supreme Court) (repeat-offender rationale and community protection)
Jensen v. Gladden, 231 Or 141 (Oregon Supreme Court) (upholding enhanced sentence where defendant endangered children)
State v. Wheeler, 343 Or 652 (Oregon Supreme Court) (upholding facial constitutionality of ORS 137.719)
Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (U.S. Supreme Court) (Eighth Amendment limits on death penalty for non-homicide sexual crimes)