- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
- Date Filed: 09-14-2016
- Case #: A156336
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; Tookey, J.; & DeHoog, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed his conviction of second-degree assault, arguing the trial court erred in failing give jury instructions related to his defense of self-defense. The State argued the instructions were confusing and that the facts did not show that two people had assaulted Defendant. The Court held that the trial court erred in failing to provide the jury with the requested instructions, which violated its “obligation [to] state to [the jury] all matters of law necessary for their information in giving their verdict.” State v. Harryman, 277 Or. App. 346 (2016). The Court also held that the record indicated there was evidence that two people attacked Defendant before he committed the alleged crime, and therefore it would have been relevant to provide instructions regarding the nature of the attack. The Court further held that the failure to give the requested instructions could have affected the result, and thus warranted reversal. Conviction on Count 1 reversed and remanded; otherwise affirmed.