Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. IVY FRANCINE CONGER, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1993-05-12
Citations: 120 Or. App. 220
Docket Number: 90-10-1676-C; CA A72340
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. IVY FRANCINE CONGER, Appellant.
Judges: Before Richardson, Chief Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 120
Pages: 220–221

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted October 28, 1992,
reversed and remanded with instructions May 12, 1993
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. IVY FRANCINE CONGER, Appellant.
(90-10-1676-C; CA A72340)
851 P2d 636
David E. Groom, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, Salem.
Robert B. Rocklin, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Charles S. Crookham, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Mary H. Williams, Assistant Attorney General, Salem.
Before Richardson, Chief Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals her conviction for delivery of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992. In her first assignment, she contends that the court erred by denying her motion to quash the indictment on the ground that the grand jury that returned it had only six members. The parties stipulated that one grand juror had been excused during the time that the indictment in this case was being considered.
The court erred in denying the motion. Goodwin v. State of Oregon, 116 Or App 279, 840 P2d 1372 (1992).
Reversed and remanded with instructions to quash the indictment.