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. Simrin

Court of Appeals of Oregon

November 29, 2017

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
ANDY SIMRIN, Defendant-Appellant.

          Argued and submitted March 8, 2016.

         Marion County Circuit Court 12C45116 Debra K. Vogt, Judge.

          Lawrence Matasar argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

          Jamie K. Contreras, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, and Paul L. Smith, Deputy Solicitor General.

          Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and Shor r, Judge.

         Case Summary:

         Defendant appeals from the trial court's denial of his motion to set aside the record of his arrest for contempt of court under ORS 137.225(1) (b) (2013), which allows records of arrests that have not led to convictions to be set aside. The state opposed that motion, arguing that contempt is not a crime and that the statute only allows a court to set aside the arrest record of a person arrested for crimes. The trial court concluded that the statute did not apply to defendant. On appeal, defendant argues that the statute does apply to his record of arrest because the citation he received in lieu of arrest stated that he was accused of a "crime" and "offense" and the charging instrument purported to charge defendant with five counts of "the crimes of" contempt of court, which it labeled as a "U-Misdemeanor."

         Held:

         The trial court erred when it concluded that ORS 137.225(1)(b) (2013) did not apply to defendant's record of arrest for contempt and when it denied defendant's motion. Defendant was arrested for and charged with the "crime" of contempt of court. Those charges were then dismissed. The legislature intended for ORS 137.225(1)(b) (2013) to allow persons arrested for and charged with, but not convicted of, crimes to be able to have the record of those arrests set aside.

         [289 Or.App. 69] Reversed and remanded for entry of an order setting aside defendant's record of arrest pursuant to ORS 137.225(1)(b).

         [289 Or.App. 70] EGAN, J.

         Defendant appeals from the trial court's denial of his motion to set aside the record of his arrest for contempt of court under ORS l37.225(1)(b) (2013).[1] Defendant assigns error to the trial court's denial of his motion, challenging the trial court's conclusion that ORS l37.225(1)(b) does not apply to defendant.[2] We agree with defendant that the statute does apply to him, and we reverse and remand for the trial court to enter an order setting aside defendant's record of arrest for contempt.[3]

         Because defendant's appeal turns on the proper meaning and application of ORS l37.225(1)(b), a matter of statutory interpretation, we review for errors of law. State v. Branam, 220 Or.App. 255, 258, 185 P.3d 557, rev den, 345 Or. 301 (2008).

         The pertinent facts are undisputed. Defendant, an attorney, was issued a citation in lieu of arrest for contempt of court for disobeying an order of the Marion County Circuit Court. The citation form stated that defendant was cited for a "crime" and had committed the "offense" of contempt of court. He was charged by information with five counts of contempt of court under ORS 33.015. The charging instrument stated that defendant was accused of the "crimes" of contempt, labeled each count as a "U Misdemeanor, " and stated that "Def[endant] needs to be printed." In the charging instrument, the state sought ...


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.