Skip to main content

State v. Spring

Citations

  • 21 P.3d 657
  • 172 Or. App. 508
  • 2001 Ore. App. LEXIS 182

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that rape and sexual abuse guilty verdicts do not merge under ORS 161.067(1) because each offense contains an element that the other does not
  • holding that offenses of rape and first-degree sexual abuse have different elements and therefore do not merge under ORS 161.067
  • noting that merger and jury instruction issues are essentially the same and holding that rape and sexual abuse offenses did not merge
  • imputing analysis of a case decided under former ORS 161.062, to a case under ORS 161.067 because both laws were drafted in 1985, began as identically worded proposals, and “the relevant text of the two statutes is identical”
  • because the defendant’s sexual abuse convictions and his rape convictions “each * * * require [d] proof of an element” that the other did not, ORS 161.067(1) was applicable and precluded the merger of those convictions (emphasis added)
  • convictions did not merge where defendant violated multiple statutory provisions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Haselton, Deits, Wollheim

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 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.