Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. SHANE ALLAN ROY, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1980-08-04
Citations: 47 Or. App. 521
Docket Number: No. 10-79-05529, CA 16532
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. SHANE ALLAN ROY, Appellant.
Judges: Before Joseph, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Warren, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 47
Pages: 521–523

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted June 23,
affirmed August 4, 1980
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. SHANE ALLAN ROY, Appellant.
(No. 10-79-05529, CA 16532)
619 P2d 648
Marilyn C. McManus, argued the cause for appellant. On the brief were Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, and James E. Mountain, Jr., Deputy Public Defender, Salem.
Rudolph S. Westerband, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were James M. Brown, Attorney General, and Walter L. Barrie, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Joseph, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Warren, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals from the judgment on his conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. He raises a number of assignments of error, only one of which has merit. A portion of a security release questionnaire bearing defendant's purported signature was admitted into evidence over his objection. Under the rule in State v. Lockwood, 43 Or App 639, 603 P2d 1231 (1980), that ruling was erroneous. However, as was also true in Hartfield, the error was not such as to require reversal in the light of the other evidence.
Affirmed.