State v. Edwards

• Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
• Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
• Date Filed: 07-05-2012
• Case #: A144197
• Judge(s)/Court Below: Brewer, P.J. for the Court; Haselton, C.J.

ORS 164.415(1) and its three subsections (a)-(c) are alternative theories that define a single crime. Therefore, it is improper to charge a person with multiple counts stemming from a single incident that simultaneously satisfy multiple subsections of ORS 164.415(1).

Defendant Edwards was found guilty, inter alia, of four counts of aggravated robbery based on the robbery of two separate victims at two discrete times. The State charged Defendant with ORS 164.415(1)(a) and (1)(c) for each victim. Although Defendant did not object to the entry of separate convictions to the trial court, he later appealed claiming it was plain error. The Court of Appeals held that the legislature intended the subparagraphs (a)-(c) of 164.415(1) to be “alternative” ways to find a defendant guilty of a single crime, aggravated robbery. Thus it was plain error to find the Defendant guilty of four counts of robbery in the first degree when only two were committed. Reversed and remanded for merger of duplicative counts; otherwise affirmed.

Share Subscribe