Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. MICHAEL ROBERT PATRICK, Respondent; STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. GERALD GENE SPINNEY, Respondent; STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. CLIFFORD CONNORTON, Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1978-01-16
Citations: 32 Or. App. 35
Docket Number: No. T 44858, CA 8201; No. T 44730, CA 8202; No. T 45401, 8203
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. MICHAEL ROBERT PATRICK, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. GERALD GENE SPINNEY, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. CLIFFORD CONNORTON, Respondent.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Tanzer and Johnson, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 32
Pages: 35–37

Head Matter:
Submitted on records and appellant’s brief December 22, 1977,
CA 8201 and 8202 dismissed, CA 8203 reversed and remanded January 16,
opinion modified on reconsideration 34 Or App 17, 578 P2d 807 May 8, 1978
STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. MICHAEL ROBERT PATRICK, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. GERALD GENE SPINNEY, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. CLIFFORD CONNORTON, Respondent.
(No. T 44858, CA 8201) (No. T 44730, CA 8202) (No. T 45401, 8203)
(Cases consolidated)
573 P2d 1259
James A. Redden, Attorney General, Al J. Laue, Solicitor General, and Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the brief for appellant.
James G. Nelson, Goode, Goode, Decker & Beck-ham, P.C., Albany, appeared for respondents Michael Robert Patrick and Gerald Gene Spinney.
No appearance for respondent Clifford Connorton.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Tanzer and Johnson, Judges.
SCHWAB, C. J.

Opinion:
SCHWAB, C. J.
In these three consolidated appeals the trial judge sustained demurrers to charges of violation of ORS 487.540, driving while under the influence of intoxicants. The trial judge was clearly in error on the merits. However, we can reach the question in only one of the three cases, State v. Connorton, in which the order appealed from states:
" Defendant's Demurrer is hereby allowed and the citation is hereby dismissed." (Emphasis supplied.)
In the other two cases, one order "allows" the demurrer and the other order "grants" the demurrer. The orders do not go on to dismiss the charges. As State v. Thomas, 32 Or App 85, 573 P2d 1259 (1978), points out, the orders sustaining demurrers are not appeal-able.
CA Nos. 8201 and 8202 are dismissed. CA No. 8203 is reversed and remanded.