Submitted December 16, 2015
County Circuit Court 13CR1532; Richard L. Barron, Judge.
Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Erik Blumenthal, Deputy Public
Defender, Offce of Public Defense Services, fled the brief
F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Paul L. Smith, Deputy
Solicitor General, and Michael S. Shin, Assistant Attorney
General, fled the brief for respondent.
DeVore, Presiding Judge, and Garrett, Judge, and Duncan,
Judge pro tempore.
appeals her convictions for two counts of identity theft, ORS
165.800, among other crimes, challenging the trial
court's denial of her motions for judgments of acquittal
on the identity theft counts. Defendant argues that the state
presented insufficient evidence to support a finding that she
possessed and transferred the victim's identification
“with the intent to deceive or defraud.” Held:
Defendant searched the victim's jacket, which had many
pockets, and removed identification, banking, and gift cards
that were together in one pocket. She gave some of the cards,
which could be used to steal the victim's identity, to
her companion. Based on that evidence, a reasonable fact
finder could find that defendant possessed and transferred
the cards with the intent to deceive or defraud.
DUNCAN, J. pro tempore
appeals her convictions for one count of unlawful possession
of methamphetamine, ORS 475.894 (Count 1), two counts of
identity theft, ORS 165.800 (Counts 2 and 3), and one count
of third-degree theft, ORS 164.043 (Count 4). On appeal,
defendant raises four assignments of error. We write only to
address defendant's first and second assignments of
error, in which she challenges the trial court's denial
of her motions for judgments of acquittal on the two counts
of identity theft. For the reasons explained below, we
reviewing a trial court's denial of a defendant's
motion for judgment of acquittal, "we review the record
and all reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom in
the light most favorable to the state to determine whether
the trier of fact could have found all of the elements of the
charged offenses beyond a reasonable doubt." State
v. Clum. 216 Or.App. 1, 5, 171 P.3d 980 (2007) (citing
State v. Cervantes, 319 Or. 121, 125, 873 P.2d 316
was charged with two counts of identity theft for violating
ORS 165.800. One count was for possessing personal
identification of another person (Count 2), and the other
count was for transferring the personal identification of
another person (Count 3).
defendant's jury trial, the state presented evidence
that, on the date of the charged crimes, defendant was at a
casino with a companion, Randolph. A casino patron, Siegel,
left her jacket on a chair when she went to cash in a ticket.
Randolph pointed out the jacket to defendant, who took it
from the chair and carried it into the women's restroom.
When Siegel returned to the chair, she noticed that the
jacket was gone and immediately informed casino [287 Or.App.
70] security officers. The security officers found the jacket
in the restroom and returned it to Siegel.
called the police, who came to the casino and reviewed video
footage from the casino's surveillance system. The
footage showed defendant taking Siegel's jacket after
Randolph pointed it out to her, walking to the restroom with
Randolph, and entering the restroom with the jacket, but
exiting the restroom without it. After viewing the footage,
the police located defendant in the casino. She was in
possession of items that had been in Siegel's jacket,
including keys, cigarettes, an energy drink, and a Walmart
gift card. The police checked the restroom trash for other
items that had been in Siegel's jacket, but did not find
any. Defendant told the police that she had given the
identification and banking cards that had been in the jacket
to Randolph. The next night, an associate of Randolph's
turned in five cards at a convenience store located a few
miles south of the casino, claiming to have found them. The