Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

321 Or. App. 79

State v. Wagner

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 27, 2022

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2022-07-27

Petition for reconsideration allowed · Decided 2022-07-27

                                     79

      On appellant’s petition for reconsideration filed May 23; petition for
reconsideration allowed, former opinion (
319 Or App 399
, 
509 P3d 731
) modified
      and adhered to as modified July 27, 2022; petition for review denied
                         January 19, 2023 (
370 Or 714
)


                    STATE OF OREGON,
                     Plaintiff-Respondent,
                               v.
               KENNETH SHERIDAN WAGNER,
                     Defendant-Appellant.
                 Lincoln County Circuit Court
                     19CR68935; A173918
                                 
515 P3d 402


   Thomas O. Branford, Judge.
   Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Laura A. Frikert, Deputy Public Defender, Office
of Public Defense Services for petition.
  Before Mooney, Presiding Judge, and Joyce, Judge, and
Hadlock, Judge pro tempore.
   JOYCE, J.
    Petition for reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified.
80                                                State v. Wagner

           JOYCE, J.
         Defendant seeks reconsideration of our decision in
State v. Wagner, 
319 Or App 399
, 
509 P3d 731
 (2022). We
allow the petition for reconsideration, modify our opinion
as explained below, and otherwise adhere to the opinion as
modified.
        Among other things, defendant on reconsideration
maintains that, in footnote 2, we incorrectly refused “to
decide whether [the officer] was qualified to offer scientific
opinion evidence on strangulation.” To more clearly explain
what we are, and are not, deciding, we replace footnote 2 at
page 406 with the following new footnote:
     “On appeal, defendant does not challenge the scientific
     validity and reliability of Dorsey’s testimony. The only
     issue on appeal related to Dorsey’s testimony is her qualification to offer proffered expert testimony under OEC 702.”
We reject defendant’s other arguments on reconsideration
without discussion.
        Petition for reconsideration allowed; former opinion
modified and adhered to as modified.

/321/orapp/79 · .json · Public domain