|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|State of Oregon v. James Robert Newman|
|Supreme Court Courtroom|
|Jesse Wm Barton on behalf of James Robert Newman|
Rolf Moan on behalf of the State of Oregon
Statement of Issues:
|State of Oregon v. James Robert Newman (S060182) (A142837) (appeal from Multnomah County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 246 Or App 334, 265 P3d 86 (2011)).|
Defendant James Robert Newman seeks review of a Court of Appeals decision affirming a trial court's evidentiary ruling that had excluded defendant's proffered evidence of "sleep-driving" in his trial for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) on the basis that the proffered evidence was not relevant because DUII is a strict liability offense.
On review, the issues are:
(1) Does the DUII statute's driving element require a culpable mental state?
(2) Does the DUII statute's driving element require volition?
(3) In a DUII prosecution, must a defendant be allowed to raise as a defense that, owing to conduct or a physical condition other than intoxication, he lacked the culpable mental state required for driving a motor vehicle, and he did not voluntarily drive a motor vehicle?
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: