Oregon Supreme Court· 9/8/1999

State v. Barnes

Citations

986 P.2d 1160
329 Or. 327
1999 Ore. LEXIS 593

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that New York drafters applied “knowingly” to “an awareness of con- duct or circumstances” but not to “awareness of a potential result”
stating that failing to give a proffered instruction is error only when the defendant can show, among other things, “that the given instructions did not adequately encompass his theory”
disagreeing that “knowingly” refers to “knowledge of the result that followed from defendant’s conduct”
holding that to sustain a conviction under subsection (l)(a) of Oregon’s second-degree assault statute, “the state needs to prove only that defendant was aware of the assaultive nature of his conduct and that his conduct in fact caused the victim serious physical injury”
explaining that “the definition of ‘knowingly’ addresses only ‘conduct’ and ‘circumstances’ and does not also include a reference to ‘result,’” thereby requiring no mens rea as to result
analyzing the phrase “knowingly causes serious physical injury” in the crime of second-degree assault, ORS 163.175(1)(a)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carson, Gillette, Van Hoomissen, Durham, Leeson, Riggs

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.