Oregon v. Ford

Defendant Kevin Gord, Jr. fired a gun at a vehicle with two occupants, neither of whom died. He was charged with, among other crimes, two counts of attempted aggravated murder. He unsuccessfully demurred to those counts of the indictment, arguing that the state had not charged a viable theory of attempted aggravated murder because the death of “more than one murder victim” in the same criminal episode was a circumstance element of the crime defined in ORS 163.095(1)(d), and because a circumstance element could not be “attempted.” At trial, defendant was acquitted of both counts of attempted aggravated murder but was convicted of other crimes. On appeal, despite the acquittal, defendant challenged the denial of his demurrer, arguing that that denial prejudiced him because it allowed for the admission of evidence relevant to the counts of attempted aggravated murder that may not have been admissible if trial had been limited to the other counts in the indictment. The Court of Appeals summarily affirmed based on its decision in Oregon v. Kyger, 471 P3d 764 (2020). The Oregon Supreme Court concluded defendant’s argument was without merit. Because the circuit court did not err in denying the demurrer, the Supreme Court deemed it unnecessary to address defendant’s remaining arguments concerning prejudice. The decision of the Court of Appeals and the judgment of the circuit court were affirmed.