- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
- Date Filed: 01-26-2022
- Case #: A172782
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Lagesen, C.J. for the Court; James, P.J.; & Kistler, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
A jury found Defendant guilty of first-degree animal abuse for shooting a dog which charged him and then shooting the dog again to end it’s suffering. The animal abuse charge was based on the second shot. Defendant argued that the trial court erred by not allow Defendant to assert a choice-of-evils defense and declined to include it in the jury instructions. A Defendant is entitled to have the jury instructed on a properly raised defense if there is any evidence to support the presence of each element of the defense. Defendant asserts his actions were necessary to avoid prolonging the suffering of the dog. Defendant has evidence to attempt to prove his defense. A reasonable jury could find his actions were justified. Reversed and remanded.