Date: 10-24-2024

Case Style:

State of Oregon v. John Hatchman Mullin IV

Case Number: CC20CR36687

Judge: Not vailable

Court: Circuit Court, Marion County, Oregon

Plaintiff's Attorney: Marion County, Oregon District Attorney's Office

Defendant's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Salem Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory

Description:

Salem, Oregon criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with offensive physical contact.

This criminal case presents the same issue that we resolved today in State v. Eggers, 372 Or. 789, ___P.3d___ (October 24, 2024), involving whether the misdemeanor crime of harassment that involves subjecting another person to offensive physical contact, ORS 166.065(1)(a)(A), constitutes a "qualifying misdemeanor" under the unlawful possession of a firearm statute, ORS 166.255. The Court of Appeals in this case concluded that the trial court had erred in imposing the firearms prohibition for defendant's harassment conviction, citing its own decision in Eggers that had concluded that harassment was not a "qualifying misdemeanor." State v. Mullin, 327 Or.App. 319, 320-21 (2023) (nonprecedential memorandum opinion) (citing State v. Eggers, 326 Or.App. 337, 344, 532 P.3d 518 (2023)). Today, however, we reversed the Court of Appeals decision in Eggers, concluding instead that harassment is a qualifying misdemeanor under ORS 166.255. Eggers, 372 Or at 808. We therefore vacate the decision of the Court of Appeals in this case, in part, and remand to that court for further consideration.[1]...

State v. Mullin, 372 Or. 809, SC S070420 (Or. Oct 24, 2024)

Outcome: Reversed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: