Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RICHARD L. GERTTULA, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1979-08-27
Citations: 41 Or. App. 675
Docket Number: No. H19756, CA 13425
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RICHARD L. GERTTULA, Appellant.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Tanzer and Roberts, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 41
Pages: 675–677

Head Matter:
Argued June 27,
affirmed August 27, 1979
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RICHARD L. GERTTULA, Appellant.
(No. H19756, CA 13425)
598 P2d 1257
Steven D. Gerttula, Astoria, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Anderson, Fulton, Lavis & Van Thiel, Astoria.
Jan P. Londahl, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were James A. Redden, Attorney General, and Walter L. Barrie, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Tanzer and Roberts, Judges.
TANZER, J.

Opinion:
TANZER, J.
Defendant appeals his conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants, ORS 487.100. He assigns as error the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal based on the absence of evidence that the arresting deputy sheriffs were in uniform. Defendant asserts that such proof is necessary pursuant to ORS 487.105, which provides:
"Any police officer attempting to enforce the traffic laws of this state shall be in uniform or shall conspicuously display an official identification card showing his lawful authority."
The attire of the arresting officer is not an element of the crime of driving under the influence of intoxicants. An opinion stating such an obvious proposition would be unnecessary had we not been advised by counsel that at least one district court routinely allows such motions. The motion for judgment of acquittal was properly denied.
Affirmed.