244 P.3d 910
Or. Ct. App.2010Background
- Harmon was convicted of DUII in a trial; trial evidence included officer observations of odor of alcohol, a dazed state, and six sobriety indicators; Harmon admitted drinking a beer an hour and several shots of Jack Daniels; a marijuana pipe was found and he admitted smoking marijuana earlier that night; defense moved for judgment of acquittal on insufficiency of evidence for combined alcohol and marijuana impairment; trial court denied the motions and Harmon was convicted; on appeal Harmon argued no evidence showed impairment from a combination of alcohol and marijuana; the State relied on Huck to argue jurors could infer impairment without a DRE or toxicology; court affirmed in part and discussed standard for sufficiency of evidence under King.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for impairment by combo of alcohol and marijuana | Harmon argues no evidence shows impairment from a combination | Harmon contends no proof of causation or impairment from marijuana | Sufficiency upheld; jury could infer impairment from admissions and observed state under Huck/King jurisprudence |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Huck, 785 P.2d 785 (Or. App. 1990) (jury may infer impairment from admissions and observable effects without a DRE)
- State v. King, 768 P.2d 391 (Or. 1989) (standard: whether rational jury could find guilt beyond reasonable doubt from the evidence)