State v. Morales
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
98 September 27, 2017 No. 469 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. LYNETTE RENEE MORALES, Defendant-Appellant. Lane County Circuit Court 15CR38427; A162046 Charles M. Zennaché, Judge. Submitted August 4, 2017. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Vanessa Areli, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Shannon T. Reel, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and DeVore, Judge, and James, Judge. PER CURIAM Conviction for interfering with a peace officer reversed and remanded; otherwise affirmed. Cite as 288 Or App 98 (2017) 99 PER CURIAM Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for one count of interfering with a peace officer, arguing that the trial court erred by conducting a bench trial when the record does not include a written jury trial waiver from defendant on that count. The state concedes that the trial court erred and that we must reverse and remand. See Or Const, Art I, § 11 (requiring that jury trial waivers be “in writing”); State v. Barber, 343 Or 525, 530, 173 P3d 827 (2007) (holding that the trial court erred by conducting a bench trial in the absence of a written jury trial waiver and that, given the specific, constitutional requirement of a written waiver, this court had no discretion not to correct the error). We agree with and accept the concession. Accordingly, we reverse and remand the conviction for interfering with a peace officer.1 Conviction for interfering with a peace officer reversed and remanded; otherwise affirmed. 1 The judgment also addressed a misdemeanor count of driving under the influence of intoxicants, on which defendant entered diversion after a plea. Our decision does not affect the disposition of that count.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
