Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CLEO GENE RODERICK, Appellant
Court: Oregon Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1968-07-03
Citations: 250 Or. 457
Docket Number: Case No. C-44475
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CLEO GENE RODERICK, Appellant.
Judges: Before Perry, Chief Justice, and McAllister, Sloan, O’Connell, Goodwin, Denecke and Holman, Justices.
Reporter: Oregon Reports
Volume: 250
Pages: 457–457

Head Matter:
Argued April 2,
affirmed July 3, 1968
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CLEO GENE RODERICK, Appellant.
(Case No. C-44475)
443 P. 2d 169
Gary D. Babcock, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Lawrence A. Aschenbrenner, Public Defender, Salem.
Jacob B. Tanser, Assistant Chief Deputy District Attorney, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was George Van Hoomissen, District Attorney, Portland.
Before Perry, Chief Justice, and McAllister, Sloan, O’Connell, Goodwin, Denecke and Holman, Justices.

Opinion:
PERRY, C. J.
The defendant was convicted of the crime of armed robbery and appeals.
While this case is concerned with an armed robbery committed by defendant upon a different person and at a different time and place than disclosed by the facts in State v. Gene Roderick, 250 Or 452, 443 P2d 167, decided this day, the legal issues assigned as error by the defendant are identical, as they arose out of the same arrest and seizure of the same .45 Colt pistol. Therefore, the opinion in State v. Gene Roderick, supra, is controlling.
The judgment is affirmed.