State v. G.E.S.

Under ORS 419A.196, the acts from which an adjudication arises are those of the youth and not a third party.

G.E.S appealed the denial of his motion to dismiss, assigning error to the same. On appeal, G.E.S. argued the conduct on which the State based the present proceeding, the theft of a mobile phone, is the same as conduct for which he was previously adjudicated on a probation violation for failing to report law enforcement contact because the theft led to the law enforcement contact which led to his obligation to report such contact, an obligation he failed to fulfill. In response, the State argued that the failure to report and theft are distinct acts and, therefore, the two proceedings did not arise from the same conduct. Under ORS 419A.196, the acts from which an adjudication arises are those of the youth and not a third party. The Court found that G.E.S’s failure to report was independent and did not arise from the theft. The Court reasoned that G.E.S. “could have reported or not reported the contact to his probation officer, independently of whether he had committed the theft.” G.E.S. engaged in two acts, the theft and the failure to report, both of which can give rise to separate adjudications. Affirmed.