Skip to main content

State v. Andrews

Citations

  • 27 P.3d 137
  • 174 Or. App. 354
  • 2001 Ore. App. LEXIS 699

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that, when a circumstance transforms otherwise innocent conduct into criminally culpable conduct, the existence of the circumstance is a material element that necessarily requires a culpable mental state
  • noting that, in a court trial, a “matter of law”-like contention can be adequately preserved by closing argument to that effect
  • analyzing question of when a culpable mental state is required and disavowing Van Norsdall’s analysis to the extent it differed from the analysis in that case
  • noting “the Criminal Code’s fundamental hostility toward imposing criminal liability without fault”
  • “[W]e emphasize that legislative intent must be the touchstone of analysis under ORS 161.095 to ORS 161.115.”
  • “We reverse and remand for a new trial.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haselton, Wollheim, Ceniceros

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.