Treasurer of the State of Missouri – Custodian of the Second Injury Fund v. Diana Penney

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, for purposes of theft prosecutions, the value of the stolen property is a “material element” under ORS 161.095(2) and requires proof of a culpable mental state
• concluding that the omission of a criminal negligence instruction with respect to the value of stolen property was harmless because there was little Nonprecedential Memo Op: 325 Or App 215 (2023
• concluding that the value of the property taken is a material element of the offense of theft, and thus that the legislature intended a culpable mental state to apply to the value element
• concluding that the value of the property taken is a material element of the offense of theft, and thus that the legislature intended a culpable mental state to apply to the value element
• concluding that the state is required to prove “a culpable mental state as to the value of the property taken” and assuming, “without deciding, that the applicable culpable mental state for the property-value element is criminal negligence”
• concluding that the state is required to prove “a culpable mental state as to the value of the property taken” and assuming, “without deciding, that the applicable culpable mental state for the property-value element is criminal negligence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).