State v. Kautz

How courts have described this case

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

• stating, in a double jeopardy context, that “parsing” a defendant’s criminal objective is inconsistent with ORS 131.505(4)
• rejecting the state’s assertion that a burglary and a robbery were not directed at the same criminal objective because earlier objective to steal victim’s property contin- ued during the course of events
• the “parsing of defendant’s criminal objective is inconsistent with the intent of ORS 131.505(4)”
• although the “defendant may have acquired an additional criminal objective to escape when confronted by [the victim], his earlier objective to steal [the victim’s] property continued during the course of all of the events”
• entry into workshop located near victims’ home
• entry into workshop located near victims’ home

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).