Case Name: In the Matter of L., a Minor Child, STATE ex rel JUVENILE DEPARTMENT OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY, Respondent, v. L., a Minor Child, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1976-11-01
Citations: 27 Or. App. 177
Docket Number: No. 46,316-A, CA 6347
Parties: In the Matter of L., a Minor Child, STATE ex rel JUVENILE DEPARTMENT OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY, Respondent, v. L., a Minor Child, Appellant.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Thornton and Tanzer, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 27
Pages: 177–179

Head Matter:
Argued September 22,
affirmed November 1,
reconsideration denied December 8,
petition for review denied December 28, 1976
In the Matter of L., a Minor Child, STATE ex rel JUVENILE DEPARTMENT OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY, Respondent, v. L., a Minor Child, Appellant.
(No. 46,316-A, CA 6347)
555 P2d 805
Alan Baily, Juvenile Law Center, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.
Christopher J. Fox, Certified Law Student, 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 Thornton and Tanzer, Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Upon review of the record, we agree with the finding of the trial court. Use of recently stolen property, together with a noncredible explanation as to the manner in which it came into possession, is sufficient proof of knowing use of stolen property. State v. Murphy, 253 Or 444, 446, 455 P2d 178 (1969).
Affirmed.