Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LOREN DEE FULLER, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1984-01-11
Citations: 66 Or. App. 494
Docket Number: 82-879-M; CA A28897
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LOREN DEE FULLER, Appellant.
Judges: Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 66
Pages: 494–495

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted December 20, 1983,
reversed and remanded for new trial January 11, 1984
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LOREN DEE FULLER, Appellant.
(82-879-M; CA A28897)
674 P2d 92
Richard D. Adams, Grants Pass, argued the cause for appellant. On the brief were Donald H. Coulter, and Myrick, Coulter, Seagraves, Myrick & Adams, Grants Pass.
Richard D. Wasserman, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
In light of the newly-discovered evidence presented by defendant, the trial court abused its discretion (and therefore erred) in denying defendant's motion for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded for new trial.