|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|State of Oregon v. Clifton Cory Burgess|
|Susan G. Howe, on behalf of the State of Oregon|
David O. Ferry on behalf of Clifton Cory Burgess
Statement of Issues:
|State of Oregon v. Clifton Cory Burgess (S059499) (A139500) (appeal from Washington County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 240 Or App 641, 251 P3d 765 (2011)).|
The state seeks review of a Court of Appeals decision that reversed the conviction of defendant Clifton Cory Burgess for first-degree assault and remanded for further proceedings.
On review, the issues are:
(1) With respect to sufficiency of the evidence, if a reviewing appellate court (or a trial court in the first instance) finds a deficiency in the particular legal theory of liability relied upon by the prosecutor, may the court nonetheless find the evidence sufficient if the evidence would support a guilty verdict on a different theory of liability for the same offense?
(2) Does the Due Process Clause prohibit a reviewing appellate court (or a trial court in the first instance) from considering theories of liability other than those on which the prosecutor expressly relied, when deciding whether evidence is sufficient to go before the factfinder?
The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating: