State v. Palomo, 301 P.3d 439

Defendant, on probation for a prior conviction, was convicted of prostitution under ORS 167.007(1)(a).
Officer Gamble observed defendant performing oral sex on Bingham; defendant denied that she exchanged sex for a fee.
Prosecutor argued there was an implied exchange for a cigarette based on overheard conversation; the court rejected admitting the cigarette-for-truth but allowed the inference for liability.
Trial court denied defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal, holding that proving the specific fee was unnecessary; it found an exchange had occurred.
On appeal, the court reversed the prostitution conviction and remanded to reconsider probation violation in light of the reversal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Meaning of 'fee' in ORS 167.007(1)(a).	Fee has economic value and is part of a commercial transaction.	Fee requires evidence of a thing with economic value; a kiss or non-monetary item cannot suffice.	Reversed MJOA; no legally sufficient evidence of an exchange for a fee.
Sufficiency of evidence to prove exchange for sexual conduct for a fee.	Circumstantial evidence permits inferring an agreement to exchange sexual conduct for a cigarette.	Record lacks proof of what was exchanged and its value.	Reversed MJOA; cannot prove the exchange had economic value.
Impact on probation violation after reversing prostitution conviction.	Probation violation based on prostitution should be reconsidered if conviction is vacated.	Remand is needed to reassess probation in light of vacated conviction.	Remanded for reconsideration consistent with reversal of prostitution conviction.

State v. Davis, 254 Or App 387 (2012) (context for consistent factual findings on appeal)
State v. Cervantes, 319 Or 121 (1994) (MJOA standard: rational juror could find elements beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Spainhower, 251 Or App 25 (2012) (define ordinary meaning of terms in statutes)
State v. Trivitt, 247 Or App 199 (2011) (MJOA equivalent concept in closing argument context)
State v. Brown, 53 Or App 666 (1981) (reconsider probation when primary conviction is vacated)