Oregon Supreme Court· 12/4/1984

State v. Hill

Citations

692 P.2d 100
298 Or. 270
1984 Ore. LEXIS 1910

How courts have described this case

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

explaining that “the attitude [that the accused] displays toward the consequences of his acts” is relevant to a finding of extreme indifference
distinguishing between recklessness and gross negligence and stating that recklessness for purposes of ORS 161.085 requires proof of a higher degree of awareness of a risk than gross negligence
distinguishing between recklessness and gross negligence and stating that recklessness for purposes of ORS 161.085 requires proof of a higher degree of awareness of a risk than gross negligence
reversing where the instruction given required a mental state of gross or criminal negligence, but the statute required a higher mental state of recklessness and thus “may have led the jury to convict [the] defendant upon a finding of lesser culpability than is required by statute”
reversal is required if the record demonstrates that the jury could have convicted the defendant without finding that the defendant acted with the required level of culpability
court reversed third-degree assault conviction when jury incorrectly instructed on mens rea element, because erroneous instruction may have led jury to convict upon finding of lesser culpability than statute required

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Roberts

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

6 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.