State v. Luers

How courts have described this case

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

• determining that recklessly placing a person in danger of injury or property in danger of damage are merely alternative “circumstances” or “theories” and are not separate legislative concerns about arson under ORS 164.325(1)(b)
• dismissing constitutional challenges as moot on the basis that new statutory procedures will apply on resentencing
• noting that “ordinarily a victim is a person”
• in assessing whether a defendant was prejudiced by trying multiple charges together, one relevant consideration is “the probable effectiveness of limiting instructions given to the jury by the court”
• “victim” for purposes of ORS 161.067(2), as applied to first-degree arson, ORS 164.325, is the owner of the damaged property and not other persons who were recklessly endangered by the defendant’s conduct
• defining the term “component” as “a constituent part”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).