State v. Crider

“For a single criminal act or criminal episode to give rise to more than one statutory violation, 3 three requirements must be satisfied: ‘(1) defendant must have engaged in acts that are ‘the same criminal conduct or episode’; (2) defendant’s acts must have violated two or more ‘statutory provisions’; and (3) each ‘statutory provision must require proof of an element that the others do not.’” State v. Parkins, 346 Or 333, 348, 211 P3d 262 (2009) (quoting State v. Crotsley, 308 Or 272, 278, 779 P2d 600 (1989)).”

Defendant appealed judgment of conviction on two counts: (1) failure to report as a sex offender when he changed residence under former ORS 181.812(1)(d) (2013) and (2) failing to report as a sex offender by making an annual report under former ORS 181.812(1)(e) (2013). Defendant assigned error to the trial court's failure to merge the charges. On appeal, Defendant argued that the subsections of former ORS 181.812(1) were simply two ways of carrying out the same offense. In response, the State argued that Defendant put too much stock in the structure of former ORS 181.812(1), "For a single criminal act or criminal episode to give rise to more than one statutory violation, three requirements must be satisfied: '(1) defendant must have engaged in acts that are 'the same criminal conduct or episode'; (2) defendant's acts must have violated two or more 'statutory provisions'; and (3) each 'statutory provision must require proof of an element that the others do not.'" State v. Parkins, 346 Or 333, 348, 211 P3d 262 (2009) (quoting State v. Crotsley, 308 Or 272, 278, 779 P2d 600 (1989))." The Court of Appeals held that failure to report as a sex offender after a change of residence and failure to make an annual report are separate offenses. Affirmed.