- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
- Date Filed: 05-18-2022
- Case #: A172909
- Judge(s)/Court Below: James, P.J. for the Court; Lagesen, C.J.; & Kistler, S.J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed a conviction for failure to appear in court. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal. Defendant argued that his release agreement did not specifically state that "personal appearance" was required. The State argued that "personal appearance" could be implied, despite the absence of the release agreement explicitly requiring it, because Defendant was involved in a felony trial where "personal appearance" was required. Under ORS 162.205(1)(a), “a person commits the crime of failure to appear in the first degree if the person knowingly fails to appear as required after having by court order been released from custody or a correctional facility under a release agreement or security release upon the condition that the person will subsequently appear personally in connection with a charge against the person of having committed a felony.” The Court found that the text of ORS 162.205 is plain and provides that a release agreement must include a “condition that the person will subsequently appear personally. The Court reasoned that, under State v. Lobue, 300 Or App 340, 345-46, 453 P3d 929 (2019), Defendant’s release agreement had to unambiguously state that he would be required to appear, which was not the case. Reversed.