Case Title: State v. Roberti

Citation: 293 Or. 236, 646 P.2d 1341

Docket Number: 

State: oregon

Court: Oregon Supreme Court

Date: 1982-06-22T00:00:00Z

Document:
646 P.2d 1341 (1982)
293 Or. 236
STATE of Oregon, Respondent On Rehearing/Petitioner On Review,
v.
Gary Patrick ROBERTI, Petitioner On Rehearing/Respondent On Review.
TC T79-12-0348, CA 18838; SC 27840.

Supreme Court of Oregon, In Banc.
Submitted on Petition for Rehearing May 24, 1982.
Decided June 22, 1982.
*1342 J. Michael Alexander and Brown, Burt, Swanson, Lathen & Alexander, Salem, for petitioner.
No appearance contra.
Submitted on Respondent's Petition for Rehearing May 24, 1982.
LENT, Justice.
Upon defendant's petition for rehearing, Justice Roberts withdraws her former concurring opinion and joins in Justice Lent's former dissenting opinion, which had been joined by Justice Peterson. Justice Linde also joins in the former dissenting opinion of Justice Lent for the reasons stated in Justice Linde's former dissenting opinion. The result is that a majority of the court now holds that the trial court erred in overruling the objection to receipt of the evidence as described in the former majority opinion, State v. Roberti, 293 Or. 59, 62-63, 644 P.2d 1104, 1106, 1107 (1982).
It remains to consider whether the error, beyond a reasonable doubt, was harmless. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 87 S. Ct. 824, 17 L. Ed. 2d 705 (1967); Or.Const. Art. VII (Amend), § 3; State v. Naylor, 291 Or. 191, 196, 629 P.2d 1308, 1310 (1981). In announcing his decision as factfinder, the trial judge stated:
We find, as did the Court of Appeals, that the trial court error was not harmless.
It follows that the decision of the Court of Appeals must be affirmed and the case remanded to the District Court for trial.
DENECKE, C.J., and TANZER and CAMPBELL, JJ., dissent for the reasons stated in Justice TANZER'S former majority opinion.