Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RAUL ZUNIGA-ZARMIENTO, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2006-09-27
Citations: 208 Or. App. 325
Docket Number: 040241876; A124629
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RAUL ZUNIGA-ZARMIENTO, Appellant.
Judges: Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Brewer, Chief Judge, and Linder, Judge.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 208
Pages: 325–326

Head Matter:
Submitted on record and briefs August 4,
reversed September 27,2006
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RAUL ZUNIGA-ZARMIENTO, Appellant.
040241876; A124629
144 P3d 1024
Peter A. Ozanne, Executive Director, Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Eric Johansen, Senior Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Willaims, Solicitor General, and Douglas F. Zier, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Brewer, Chief Judge, and Linder, Judge.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant was convicted of tampering with physical evidence, ORS 162.295. On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court should have granted his motion for a judgment of acquittal because the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the state, does not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant destroyed physical evidence with the intent to keep it from being used in an official proceeding. The state concedes that the evidence is insufficient and that the trial court erred. We agree and accept the state's concession.
Reversed.