Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

326 Or. App. 550

State v. Ducker

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 22, 2023

This page is marked noindex.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2023-06-22

Applies OR 166 § 166.416 · OR 166 § 166.425

Conviction on Count 1 reversed · Decided 2023-06-22

                                   550

   This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
    pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
         except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
Submitted May 9, conviction on Count 1 reversed, remanded for resentencing,
  otherwise affirmed June 22, petition for review denied November 2, 2023
                               (
371 Or 511
)


                    STATE OF OREGON,
                     Plaintiff-Respondent,
                               v.
                 TREMAIN THIEL DUCKER,
                    Defendant-Appellant.
                  Lane County Circuit Court
                    20CR51020; A176594


  Kamala H. Shugar, Judge.
   Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Mark Kimbrell, Deputy Public Defender, Office
of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Robert M. Wilsey, Assistant Attorney
General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and
Kamins, Judge.
  KAMINS, J.
   Conviction on Count 1 reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 
326 Or App 550
 (2023)            551

        KAMINS, J.
          Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for
unlawfully purchasing a firearm, ORS 166.425 (Count 1),
and providing false information in connection with a transfer of a firearm, ORS 166.416 (Count 2), raising two assignments of error. Regarding her first assignment of error,
defendant asserts that the trial court erred in denying her
motion for judgment of acquittal on Count 1. On appeal, the
state concedes that the record lacked evidence that defendant knew that state law prohibited her from purchasing
a firearm. We accept that concession. In her second assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred
by denying her motion for judgment of acquittal on Count 2.
We reject that argument because the record contained sufficient evidence for a rational trier of fact to conclude that
defendant made false statements in an attempt to purchase
a firearm in violation of ORS 166.416.
        Conviction on Count 1 reversed; remanded for
resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

/326/orapp/550 · .json · Public domain