State v. Mulvaine

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
  • Date Filed: 10-07-2015
  • Case #: A152856
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, P.J. for the Court; DeVore, J.; & Flynn, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under the new standard announced in State v. Mills, under Article I, section 11 of the Oregon Constitution, the State does not have to prove appropriate venue beyond a reasonable doubt, and a defendant must challenge venue in a pretrial motion.

Defendant appealed his conviction of, inter alia, conspiracy to commit murder, ORS 163.115, ORS 161.450(2)(a). On appeal Defendant argued, and the State agreed, that under the standard the Oregon Supreme Court announced in State v. Mills, 354 Or 350, 312 P3d 515 (2013), Mulvaine was entitled to a new trial on the conspiracy charge to challenge venue. At trial Defendant moved for acquittal after the State’s case-in-chief, which the trial court denied. However, under the new Mills standard, under Article I, section 11 of the Oregon Constitution, the State is no longer required to prove proper venue beyond a reasonable doubt, and a defendant must challenge the venue in a pretrial motion, instead of in a motion of acquittal as the Supreme Court had previously held. The Court held that on remand if Defendant chooses to challenge the motion the trial court must hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the venue is proper. Conviction for conspiracy to commit murder reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Advanced Search