State v. Long

Under ORS 163.545, the “term ‘unattended’ means that the child is left under circumstances in which no responsible person is present to attend to his needs.” Commentary to Criminal Law Revision Commission Proposed Oregon Criminal Code, Final Draft and Report § 174, 176 (July 1970). It is the state’s burden to prove the elements of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt. ORS 136.415; State v. Rainey, 298 Or 459 (1985).

Defendant appealed a judgment of guilty on multiple offenses arising out of a single-car accident. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s denial of his motion of acquittal on two counts of criminal mistreatment in the first degree. On appeal, Defendant argued that he did not leave his children “unattended” within the common meaning under ORS 163.205(1)(b)(C), as the children were in the care of Olsen and Young. In response, the State argued that, even when another person is present, a dependent person may be “unattended” if the person is unable or unwilling to attend to the dependent person. Under ORS 163.545, the “term ‘unattended’ means that the child is left under circumstances in which no responsible person is present to attend to his needs.” Commentary to Criminal Law Revision Commission Proposed Oregon Criminal Code, Final Draft and Report § 174, 176 (July 1970). It is the state’s burden to prove the elements of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt. ORS 136.415; State v. Rainey, 298 Or 459 (1985). The Court held that the State failed to meet its burden as it placed the burden on Defendant to prove the elements of the offense rather than them doing it. Reversed and remanded.