State v. Dart

ORS 161.200 requires that a defendant’s perception of a threat be reasonable as gauged by an objective “reasonable person” standard and not a subjective, defendant specific standard for the choice of evils defense.

Defendant suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), was triggered by his neighbors’ semi-truck, and as a result, took action in relation the vehicles. Defendant appealed his conviction in consolidated cases for second-degree criminal trespass and third-degree criminal mischief. Defendant assigned error to the court’s failure to give the jury his specific choice-of-evils instructions and its pretrial ruling. Defendant sought to submit evidence of his PTSD as part of a choice-of-evils defense for trespassing. The State, however, contended that even if the threat element could be based on a reasonable belief that the threat to Defendant existed, the test here requires a reasonable belief of the threat. The trial court ruled evidence of Defendant’s PTSD was irrelevant and inadmissible under OEC 403. ORS 161.200 requires that a defendant’s perception of a threat be reasonable as gauged by an objective “reasonable person” standard and not a subjective, defendant specific standard. Here, Defendant exceeded the scope of conduct he claimed was necessary by trespassing. The Court held that criminal trespass was not a reasonable response to his neighbor’s actions. Affirmed.