State v. Nebert, 244 OrApp 80 (2011)

Holding:    A defendant charged with a crime requiring proof of a reckless mental state may offer evidence of a mental disease or defect sufficient to negate that element.

1)    “(* * * the paramount goal in statutory interpretation is discerning the legislature’s intent, which is accomplished by first examining statutory text and context, along with any useful legislative history).” explaining, State v. Gaines. at p. 83.

2)    The word “intent” is not defined in the criminal code, and has so many meanings in common usage that a statute using the word can only be interpreted by resorting to legislative history. at p. 84.

3)    A statement made to the Criminal Law Revision Commission by one of its reporters, as well as that reporter’s comments to the Senate Committee considering the proposed revision, is part of this statute’s legislative history. at pp. 84-85.

4)    Commentary to the Criminal Law Revision Commission’s Proposed Oregon Criminal Code is part of this statute’s legislative history. at pp. 84-85.

Filed under: uncategorized

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!