- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
- Date Filed: 09-26-2012
- Case #: A147724
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Armstrong, P.J. for the Court; Haselton, C.J., and Duncan, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant was convicted of two violations of theft. Defendant appealed, claiming the trial court erred in denying the motion to be tried by a jury and be proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The State argued that Defendant had no right to the requested procedures because the trial was a violation proceeding, not a criminal prosecution. The Court of Appeals applied the five factors laid out in Brown v. Multnomah County Dist. Ct., which include the type of offense, the nature of the penalty, the consequences of conviction, the community's view of the conviction, and associated pretrial procedures. Pursuant to an analysis of these factors, the Court held that the trial court erred because too many characteristics of a criminal prosecution existed to deny Defendant the protections of a trial by jury and proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Reversed and remanded.