Case ID: or-app_25/html/0333-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued April 20,
    affirmed April 20,
    reconsideration denied May 26, petition for review denied June 22, 1976
    STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. VINCENT DANIEL BEAUDOIN, Appellant.
    
    (No. C 74-05-1347 Cr, CA 5228)
    548 P2d 1337
    
      Robert C. Cannon, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
    
      Kevin L. Mannix, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Lee Johnson, Attorney General, and W. Michael Gillette, Solicitor General, Salem.
    Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Langtry and Thornton, Judges.
    PER CURIAM.
   PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted on jury trial of attempted murder, ORS 163.115 and 161.405. By the verdict the jury found that the defendant, a young man, was the perpetrator of a particularly brutal beating of an old man. The only assigned error worthy of notice concerns the introduction in evidence of allegedly prejudicial photographs of the elderly man. Three of the photographs can be termed as gruesome. However, each of them is taken from a different angle of the victim’s head and they do not duplicate the showing of his injuries. They are quite relevant from the standpoint of showing the intent of the perpetrator of the attack. Therefore, there was no error involved in their introduction into evidence.

Affirmed.