- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
- Date Filed: 08-03-2016
- Case #: A153615
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Armstrong P.J. for the Court; Hadlock C.J.; & Egan J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed his public indecency, second-degree disorderly conduct, and interfering with public transportation convictions because he claimed the trial court erred when it denied his motions for judgment of acquittal since no evidence showed the latter two crimes involved a physically offensive condition. The Court examined whether the sensory features of Defendant’s conduct would lead a reasonable person exposed to the Defendant to experience unpleasant sensory effects. The Court concluded that Defendant’s two sensory features were images and sound, but "the sensory features of defendant’s conduct would not cause a reasonable person exposed to them to experience unpleasant sensory effects, which are the effects to which ORS 166.025(1)(f) is addressed." The second-degree disorderly conduct and interfering with public transportation convictions were reversed.