Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. JUAN SANTOS GARCIAS, Respondent; STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. DISMAS CHAVEZ, Respondent; STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. FRANKLIN DIMAS, Respondent; STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. JUSTIN KELLY COMER, Respondent; STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. HARVEY CHICO MULLINS, Respondent; STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. CASSANDRA DIANE GRIFFITH, Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1983-04-06
Citations: 62 Or. App. 472
Docket Number: B63,876; CA A26238; B64-116; A26283; B64-116; A26284; B64-110; A26285; B63-873; A26286; B63-949; A26387
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. JUAN SANTOS GARCIAS, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. DISMAS CHAVEZ, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. FRANKLIN DIMAS, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. JUSTIN KELLY COMER, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. HARVEY CHICO MULLINS, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. CASSANDRA DIANE GRIFFITH, Respondent.
Judges: Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 62
Pages: 472–474

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted March 23,
reversed and remanded for trial April 6,
reconsideration denied April 29,
petition for review allowed July 19 (295 Or 446),
See 296 Or 688, 679 P2d 1354 (1984)
reconsideration on attorney fees denied October 7,
petition for review on attorney fees allowed December 20, 1983 (296 Or 236)
See 298 Or 152, 690 P2d 497 (1984)
STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. JUAN SANTOS GARCIAS, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. DISMAS CHAVEZ, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. FRANKLIN DIMAS, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. JUSTIN KELLY COMER, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. HARVEY CHICO MULLINS, Respondent. STATE OF OREGON, Appellant, v. CASSANDRA DIANE GRIFFITH, Respondent.
(B63,876; CA A26238 (Control))
(B64-116; A26283)
(B64-116; A26284)
(B64-110; A26285)
(B63-873; A26286)
(B63-949; A26387)
(Cases Consolidated)
661 P2d 123
Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and William F. Gary, Solicitor General, Salem.
Thomas L. Fagan, Eugene, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was Robert J. Larson, Public Defender, Eugene.
Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Warden and Young, Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
In these criminal cases, consolidated for the purpose of appeal, the state appeals rulings by various judges of the Lane County District Court that the menacing statute, ORS 163.190, is unconstitutional. This court has recently held to the contrary in State v. Anderson, 56 Or App 12, 641 P2d 40 (1982), but the judges were apparently convinced that our opinion in Anderson was overruled sub silentio in State v. Robertson, 293 Or 402, 649 P2d 569 (1982). We disagree.
Reversed and remanded for trial.
ORS 163.190 provides:
"(1) A person commits the crime of menacing if by word or conduct he intentionally attempts to place another person in fear of imminent serious physical injury.
"(2) Menacing is a Class A misdemeanor."