Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Oregon v. Nelson

April 23, 1973

STATE OF OREGON, RESPONDENT,
v.
GLEN EARL NELSON, APPELLANT. STATE OF OREGON, RESPONDENT, V. ALFRED LEWIS WOLFE, APPELLANT. STATE OF OREGON, RESPONDENT, V. RALPH LEON EHRHARD, APPELLANT



Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County. John M. Copenhaver, Judge.

Richard Albright, law student, Willamette University, Salem, argued the cause for appellants. With him on the brief were Warren H. Albright and John T. Chinock, Madras.

Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Lee Johnson, Attorney General, and John W. Osburn, Solicitor General, Salem.

Fort, Judge. Schwab, Chief Judge, and Thornton, Judge.

Fort

Each of the defendants was charged in the Justice Court of Jefferson County, Madras District, with two separate criminal complaints. One charged that the named defendant operated a motor vehicle on a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor in violation of ORS 483.992. The other charged him with operating a motor vehicle on a public road while having a level of .15 per cent or more alcohol in the blood in violation of ORS 483.999 at the same time and place as that charged in the first complaint.

The state moved to consolidate for trial the two complaints. Each named defendant objected. The justice of the peace in each case allowed the motion. Thereafter and before the trial of the cases each defendant sought a writ of review in the circuit court seeking to have that court set aside the order of the justice court allowing the consolidation for trial of the two complaints.

The circuit court in each case after argument "affirmed in all respects" the justice court order directing the consolidation of the two complaints for trial. Each of the three defendants has appealed the

circuit court order to this court. Since each of the three cases presents a single identical issue, we directed their consolidation for hearing in this court. It follows, of course, from the foregoing that none of the defendants have been convicted, sentenced or tried on any of the matters charged in the complaints.

ORS 483.992 (2) provides:

"Any person who, while being under the influence of intoxicating liquor, dangerous drugs or narcotic drugs, drives any vehicle upon any highway, street or thoroughfare within this state, shall be punished, upon conviction, by imprisonment in the county or municipal jail for not more than one year, or by fine of not more than $1,000, or both."

ORS 483.999 (1) provides:

"Any person who drives any vehicle upon any highway of this state when that person has .15 percent or more by weight of alcohol in his blood as shown by chemical analysis of the person's breath, blood, urine or saliva made pursuant to ORS 483.634 to 483.646 shall be punished, upon conviction, by imprisonment in the county or municipal jail for not ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.