<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">From DOJ’s Appellate Division:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">EVIDENCE: Victim’s out-of-court statements identifying defendant as the<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">perpetrator were admissible to impeach her testimony at trial, where she testified<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">that she made the statements but claimed they were lies, but they were not<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">admissible for substantive purposes.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">State v. Burns</span></i></b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">, 287 Or App
459, __ P3d __ (2017) (<i>per curiam</i>) (Multnomah)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">(AAIC Jamie Contreras). The victim called 911 to report that defendant, her husband, had<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">burglarized and damaged her house. She said the same thing to police when they arrived.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">Defendant was charged with first-degree burglary and second-degree criminal mischief,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">as well as witness tampering based on his calls to the victim from jail after he was<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">arrested. At trial, the victim recanted. In her testimony, she acknowledged that she had<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">made the statements in the 911 call identifying defendant, and that she had told an officer<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">that he was the perpetrator. But she claimed those statements were lies, and she blamed<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">defendant only because she was mad at him. The state offered the victim’s out-of-court<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">statements as evidence, and defendant objected to their admission for their substantive<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">value, because they were hearsay, and therefore could be considered only as<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">impeachment. The trial court (Judge Edward Jones) disagreed, reasoning that the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">statements were admissible for substantive purposes because the victim admitted that she<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">had made the out-of-court statements, and instructed the jury accordingly. The jury<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">found defendant guilty.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">Held</span></i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">: Burglary and criminal mischief
convictions reversed and remanded;<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">criminal mischief remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed. The victim’s<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">statements were admissible only for impeachment, and not as substantive evidence; the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">trial court erred in instructing the jury otherwise. But the error was harmless with respect<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">to the witness tampering charge.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:blue"><a href="http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A160727.pdf">http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A160727.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:blue"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">Note</span></i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">:
</span><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">Had the victim admitted that she made the statements and said nothing<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">more, the statements would have been admissible for all purposes. But because<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">she further testified that her out-of-court statements were untrue, they were<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">inadmissible under OEC 801(4)(a), because they were not “given under oath<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">subject to the penalty of perjury at trial, hearing, or other proceeding[.]” OEC<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black">801(4)(a).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">CONTEMPT: In prosecution for contempt for violation of a restraining order,<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">evidence sufficed to prove that defendant “willfully” violated the order, despite his<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">claim that he thought he had permission to enter the victim’s residence.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><b><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">State v. Beleke</span></i></b><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">, 287 Or App 417, __ P3d __ (2017)
(Lane) (AAG Shannon Reel).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Defendant injured his wife during a domestic dispute, and she obtained a restraining<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">order which prohibited him from, among other things, entering or attempting to enter her<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(their) residence. Defendant pleaded guilty to crimes against his wife and, at sentencing,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">the trial court imposed special probation conditions requiring him to obey the restraining<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">order and to obtain prior written permission from his probation officer before going<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">within 1,000 feet of her residence. The court also specifically ordered defendant to<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">comply with the restraining order. After he was released from custody, he met with an<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">intake officer at the probation department who was not his probation officer and had no<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">information about his case. Defendant did not inform the officer about the restraining<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">order. The officer asked for defendant’s address, and he gave the victim’s address. The<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">officer asked if the victim lived there and defendant replied, “Well, no, I live there.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That’s my house.” The officer told him he had to stay at The Mission, which was his<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">only approved residence, unless the victim did not live at that address. That evening, the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">police found defendant inside the victim’s apartment, and he acknowledged that there<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">was a restraining order against him and that he knew it prohibited him from being in the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">apartment. He was charged with contempt. At trial, he moved for a judgment of<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">acquittal, contending that the state failed to prove that he acted “willfully with bad intent”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">because he believed that the probation officer had given him permission to be in the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">apartment. The trial court (Judge Maurice Merten) denied the motion. On appeal,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">defendant repeated his claims that the state failed to prove willfulness, because the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">“various court orders and probation conditions and directives that defendant was under<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">were confusing and inconsistent, and led defendant into a trap despite his good faith<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">effort to comply” and that he had permission from the probation officer to be in the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">apartment.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Held</span></i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">: Affirmed (Garrett, J). [1] To prove contempt, the
state must establish the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">existence of a valid court order, the defendant’s knowledge of that order, and the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">defendant’s willful noncompliance with that order. The term “willfully” means<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">“intentionally and with knowledge that [the act or omission] was forbidden conduct.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">[2] The evidence was sufficient to prove that defendant understood at the time of the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">sentencing hearing that he remained bound by the restraining order “because he was<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">expressly told so.” [3] His reliance on the probation officer’s “permission” is also<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">unavailing because he failed to disclose the existence of the restraining order and lied<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">about whether the victim lived at the apartment. A rational trier of fact could infer that<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">defendant understood that he remained subject to the restraining order or, in the<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">alternative, that he had not obtained genuine “permission” to enter the a<span style="color:black"> apartment.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:13.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:blue"><a href="http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A160038.pdf">http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A160038.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<DIV>
*****CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE*****<BR>
<BR>
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system. <BR>
<BR>
************************************<BR>
</DIV></body>
</html>