- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
- Date Filed: 10-12-2016
- Case #: A158061
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; Tookey, J.; & DeHoog, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed conviction of hindering prosecution, arguing that the prosecution failed to provide sufficient evidence from which a rational trier of fact could conclude that Defendant “[h]arbor[ed] or conceal[ed]” a person under ORS 162.325(1)(a). Under ORS 162.325(1)(a), the crime of hindering prosecution is the act of harboring or concealing “a person who has committed a crime punishable as a felony.” In order to convict a person of hindering prosecution, “the state must present evidence from which a jury could reasonably conclude that the defendant concealed” such a person. The Court held that Defendant’s actions more closely resembled “obstruct[ing], by means of…deception, anyone from” discovering or apprehending such a person, which is criminalized under ORS 162.325(1)(d). The Court held that the act of harboring or concealing a person was factually distinguishable from the act of obstructing a person’s discovery or apprehension, and thus the State failed to present sufficient evidence to convict Defendant under ORS 162.325(1)(a). Reversed and remanded.