Protests 111612-K of Kriener-Hopkins

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• observing that “if the trial court discredited defendant’s testimony that she believed that the order was no longer in effect, then that alone would have established willfulness”
• concluding an objection by defense counsel is not necessary for preservation when defense counsel raised the issue in closing argument, the prosecutor understood and engaged with that issue, and the court endorsed the state’s legal position
• requiring a finding that the defendant acted “with knowledge” that such an act or omission was “forbid- den conduct”
• reversing without remand where the trial court had already made a finding on the defendant’s subjec- tive belief
• reversing without remand where the trial court had already made a finding on the defendant’s subjec- tive belief
• “There is no statutory definition of ‘willfully’ for purposes of ORS 33.015(2).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).