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. Norgren

Court of Appeals of Oregon

August 2, 2017

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
LINUS KORBIN NORGREN, Defendant-Appellant.

          Argued and submitted April 7, 2017

         Washington County Circuit Court C142869CR; Thomas W. Kohl, Judge.

          Ryan T. O'Connor argued the cause for appellant. With him on the briefs was O'Connor Weber LLP. Linus Korbin Norgren fled the supplemental brief pro se.

          Rolf C. Moan, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General.

          Sara F. Werboff, Caitlin Mitchell, and Jordan R. Silk, fled the brief amicus curiae for Oregon Justice Resource Center.

          Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Shorr, Judge.

         Case Summary:

         Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for attempted murder and three counts of second-degree assault. Defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statements to a deputy sheriff, because defendant did not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his Miranda rights.

         Held:

         Considering the totality of the circumstances, there was legally insuffcient evidence to demonstrate that, at the time the deputy sheriff read defendant his Miranda rights, defendant's state of mind was such that he maintained the requisite level of comprehension to waive his rights. As a result, the trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to suppress.

         Reversed and remanded.

         [287 Or.App. 166] TOOKEY, J.

         Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for attempted murder, ORS 163.115 and ORS 161.405, and three counts of second-degree assault, ORS 163.175. Defendant raises two assignments of error. In his first assignment of error, defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statements to a deputy sheriff, because defendant did not voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive his Miranda rights.[1] For the reasons that follow, we reverse and remand.

         We review a trial court's denial of a motion to suppress for legal error. "We are bound by the trial court's findings of fact if there is sufficient evidence in the record to support them." State v. Dovle, 262 Or.App. 456, 458-59, 324 P.3d 598, rev den, 355 Or. 880 (2014) (citing State v. Ehly,317 Or. 66, 75, 854 P.2d 421 (1993)). We limit our review to evidence presented at the suppression hearing, State v. Mazzola (A139257),238 Or.App. 201, ...


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.