State v. Reynolds
250 Or. App. 516
| Or. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Defendant was convicted on multiple counts, including Count 13 for third-degree assault against the victim.
- Evidence showed defendant did not personally inflict physical injury; she allegedly aided another who did.
- Trial court denied a motion for judgment of acquittal; jury convicted on all counts.
- Defendant appeals unpreserved, arguing plain error for insufficiency as to Count 13; the State concedes potential insufficiency.
- The panel reverses Count 13, holding plain error occurred via improper conviction based on legally insufficient proof.
- The court remands for entry of judgment on the lesser-included offense of fourth-degree assault and resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Count 13's third-degree assault conviction legally defective? | Merida-Medina controls; aiding on-scene does not prove liability. | Count 13 cannot stand; evidence insufficient for third-degree assault. | Yes; conviction reversed for Count 13 |
| Should the court exercise Ailes discretion to correct the plain error on direct appeal? | Discretionary correction appropriate due to gravity of error and availability of relief. | Discretion not warranted given total circumstances and preservation policies. | Yes; majority reasons to correct the plain error |
| What is the appropriate remedy for Count 13 after correction? | Remand for conviction on lesser-included offense and resentencing. | Remand or correction should preserve overall sentence structure without harsher outcome. | Remand for fourth-degree assault conviction and resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Merida-Medina, 221 Or App 614 (2008) (aiding on-scene does not render accomplice third-degree assault)
- State v. Pine, 336 Or 194 (2003) (on-scene aid not sufficient for third-degree assault unless intertwined)
- State v. Brown, 310 Or 347 (1990) (plain-error standard for issues apparent on the record)
- Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc., 312 Or 376 (1991) (framework for reviewing unpreserved plain-error claims)
- State v. Gornick, 340 Or 160 (2006) (limits on plain-error review; preservation policies)
- State v. Inloes, 239 Or App 49 (2010) (considerations for applying Ailes discretion when law changes post-trial)
- State v. Parkins, 346 Or 333 (2009) (ends of justice and preservation policy guidance)
- State v. Hockersmith, 181 Or App 554 (2002) (plain-error review for sufficiency challenges without MJOA)
- State v. Ryder, 230 Or App 432 (2009) (minimal burden to remedy on direct review when correcting error)