State v. Stockert

A reviewing court must examine “the language of the pertinent statutes in context and, where necessary, [they] consider legislative history and other aids to construction. PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12, 859 P2d 1143 (1993), as modified by State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160, 170-72, 206 P3d 1042 (2009).

Defendant appealed a trial court conviction for hunting with an artificial light, in violation of ORS 498.142, and hunting deer during prohibited hours, in violation of ORS 496.992. On appeal, defendant assigned error to trial court’s denial of his motions for judgment of acquittal as it relates to both hunting counts. Defendant argued that because both convictions relate to defendant shooting at the decoy deer, he was not actually “hunting,” which is defined as taking, or attempting to take wildlife, ORS 496.004(10). A reviewing court must examine “the language of the pertinent statutes in context and, where necessary, [they] consider legislative history and other aids to construction. PGE v. Bureau of Labor and Industries, 317 Or 606, 610-12, 859 P2d 1143 (1993), as modified by State v. Gaines, 346 Or 160, 170-72, 206 P3d 1042 (2009). After examining the statute, the Court of appeals held that “to hunt” includes acts intended to "kill, capture, or pursue wildlife, whether successful or not" and thus, defendant was engaged in hunting when he shot the decoy. Affirmed.