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.

State v. Streeter

Court of Appeals of Oregon

April 15, 2015

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
HERBERT LEE STREETER, III, Defendant-Appellant

Submitted December 23, 2014.

121051952; A154444. Multnomah County Circuit Court. Eric J. Bergstrom, Judge.

Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Kali Montague, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.

Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Karla H. Ferrall, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Sercombe, Presiding Judge, and Hadlock, Judge, and Tookey, Judge.

OPINION

Page 291

[270 Or.App. 442] TOOKEY, J.

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for failure to report as a sex offender, former ORS 181.599(1)(d) (2011), renumbered as ORS 181.812(1)(d) (2013). He argues that the trial court improperly denied his motion for judgment of acquittal based on an improper construction of that statute, contending that the state failed to prove precisely when the crime was committed because it failed to prove when he moved out of his grandfather's house, where he was registered. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

" Because the trial court denied defendant's motion for a judgment of acquittal, we state the facts in the light most favorable to the state." State v. Massei, 247 Or.App. 30, 32, 268 P.3d 774 (2011). " Our standard for reviewing the denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal is whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, any rational trier of fact could have found that the essential elements of the crime had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Paragon, 195 Or.App. 265, 267, 97 P.3d 691 (2004).

In 1999, defendant was convicted of a sex offense in Florida and sentenced to five years in prison. As a result of that conviction, defendant was required to register as a sex offender in Oregon. Defendant completed his initial registration in Oregon on October 22, 2008, and also reported in July 2009, April 2010, April 2011, and April 2012. Each time that he reported, defendant provided the same residential address in Portland--the address of his grandfather's house. Each time that he reported, defendant was also informed that he must report, in person, within 10 days of any change of residence.

In August, 2012, Officer Sickon conducted an investigation and found that defendant was not present at his registered address. At the time, former ORS 181.595 to 181.597 (2011), renumbered as ORS 181.806 to 181.808 (2013), required a sex offender to report to law enforcement within 10 days of a change of residence. On September 5, 2012, defendant was arrested for the crime of failure to report,[1] and [270 Or.App. 443] he spent one night in jail; he was released on September 6, 2012.

On October 3, 2012, defendant went to Sickon's office to report a change of residence. Sickon asked defendant, " 'What are you coming in to tell me?'" Defendant replied, " 'I live with my grandfather ***.'" Defendant informed Sickon that " he was going to start staying with his dad" at a different address. Sickon confirmed that that address was " a good address that [she] could use for a current registration to bring [defendant] back into compliance at that point."

Sickon then asked defendant where he had " really [been] staying" from September 6, 2012 to October 3, 2012. Defendant replied that " he had many girlfriends [and] that he stayed at their locations" during that time--that is, he told Sickon that " he had been in different girlfriends' homes all in Portland, Oregon." Sickon asked defendant for the names and addresses of his girlfriends, but he would not give them to her.

Sickon then inquired whether defendant had lived at his grandfather's house since September 6, 2012; specifically, she asked him if he had been to his grandfather's house " at any point since being released from custody" ; if he had " gone there to visit" ; if he had " gone there to spend the night, to live and sleep in any way" ; and if he had " any belongings there[.]" ...


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.