State v. Castrejon
Decision Date | 12 February 1992 |
Citation | 826 P.2d 68,111 Or.App. 299 |
Parties | STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. Leonardo D. CASTREJON, Appellant. 9004-32451; CA A66770. |
Court | Oregon Court of Appeals |
Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.
Michael M. Pacheco, Asst. Atty. Gen., Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Atty. Gen., and Virginia L. Linder, Sol. Gen., Salem.
Before BUTTLER, P.J., and ROSSMAN and DE MUNIZ, JJ.
Defendant appeals from his conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. ORS 164.135. The question is whether the jury instruction defining "reasonable doubt" was adequate.
The trial court instructed the jury:
(Emphasis supplied.)
Defendant first contends that the trial court erred in refusing to give his requested jury instruction, Uniform Criminal Jury Instruction No. 1006. 1 He argues that "UCrJI No. 1006 is a statutorily required instruction" and points to ORS 10.095(6), which provides, "[I]n criminal cases a person is innocent of a crime or wrong until the prosecution proves otherwise, and guilt shall be established beyond reasonable doubt." Nothing in that statute requires that a particular definition of "reasonable doubt" be provided to the jury. Defendant's argument is without merit.
Defendant also submits that the trial court's instruction "did not convey to the jury the required standard of conviction." In State v. Hyde, 28 Or.App. 809, 814, 561 P.2d 659, rev. den. 278 Or. 621 (1977), we wrote:
(Emphasis supplied.)
By instructing the jury that "[r]easonable doubt means just that," the trial judge utterly failed "to impress upon jurors in an effective manner the solemnity of their decision and the magnitude of certainty with which they should act." Even if the jury had understood the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Castrejon
...jury" on the required standard and that the "likelihood of misunderstanding and misapplication was substantial." State v. Castrejon, 111 Or.App. 299, 302, 826 P.2d 68 (1992). The court rejected defendant's contention that ORS 10.095(6) requires that UCrJI 1006 be given. Id. at 301, 826 P.2d......
-
State v. Castrejon
...BUTTLER, P.J., and ROSSMAN and DE MUNIZ, JJ. BUTTLER, Presiding Judge. The state has petitioned for review of our opinion, 111 Or.App. 299, 826 P.2d 68 (1992), which we treat as a petition for reconsideration. ORAP 9.15. We withdraw our opinion and affirm the In our original opinion, we rev......