State v. Newman
302 P.3d 435
Or.2013Background
- Defendant convicted of felony DUII under ORS 813.010 after stop for erratic driving and intoxication evidence.
- Defendant proffered sleepwalking/sleep driving evidence to negate a voluntary act for DUII liability.
- Trial court excluded sleep-driving evidence as irrelevant under Miller, a strict-liability analysis for intoxication.
- Court of Appeals affirmed exclusion, adopting Miller's strict-liability view for DUII intoxication element.
- Oregon Supreme Court granted review to determine if voluntary act requirements apply to the driving element of DUII.
- Court held sleep-driving evidence is relevant to whether the driving act was voluntary, reversed trial court ruling, remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ORS 161.095(1) applies to the DUII driving element | Newman: voluntary act required for driving object | Baldwin: sleep driving negates volitional driving | Yes; voluntary act required for driving element |
| Whether sleepwalking/sleep driving evidence is relevant to voluntariness | Defendant's sleepwalking shows lack of conscious driving | State: evidence irrelevant to driving act | Relevant to driving element; should be admitted |
| Whether exclusion of sleep-driving evidence was harmless error | Evidence could lead to acquittal if jurors doubt volitional act | Harmless because intoxication element established | Not harmless beyond reasonable doubt; error reversible |
| Whether Miller forecloses consideration of volitional act in DUII | Miller concerns intoxication element only | Miller controls strict-liability aspects | Miller does not address driving element; not controlling here |
| What is the proper scope of ORS 801.020(7) and ORS 161.095(1) interaction | Vehicle code limitations do not bar application of 161.095(1) | Vehicle code governs vehicle offenses exclusively | ORS 161.095(1) applies to DUII driving element; other code provisions may apply |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Miller, 309 Or 362 (1990) (drunk-driving intoxication is a strict-liability element; no culpable mental state for intoxication)
- State v. Newman, 353 Or 632 (2013) (sleep-driving evidence may bear on voluntary act though not controlling)
- State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160 (2009) (statutory construction across vehicle and criminal codes; ORS 161.095 application context)
- State v. Davis, 336 Or 19 (2003) (harmless-error standard for evidentiary rulings under Article VII)
- State v. Olmstead, 310 Or 455 (1990) (application of non-vehicle-code defenses in DUII prosecutions)
- State v. King, 316 Or 437 (1993) (DUII elements focus on driving under influence)