Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CHARLES STANLEY WAPNIARSKI, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1998-01-06
Citations: 151 Or. App. 700
Docket Number: B345525; CA A95589
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CHARLES STANLEY WAPNIARSKI, Appellant.
Judges: Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Armstrong, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 151
Pages: 700–701

Head Matter:
Submitted on record and briefs October 9,
reversed and remanded December 17,1997,
appellant’s petition for reconsideration to amend disposition of case to read “reversed” rather than “reversed and remanded” granted by order dated January 6,1998
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CHARLES STANLEY WAPNIARSKI, Appellant.
(B345525; CA A95589)
950 P2d 415
Garrett A. Richardson filed the brief for appellant.
Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Jonathan H. Fussner, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Warren, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Armstrong, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals his conviction of driving while under the influence of intoxicants. ORS 813.110. He assigns error to the court's failure to sustain his objection to expert testimony from a drug recognition expert as lacking in foundation. He also assigns error to the court's failure to grant his motion for judgment of acquittal.
The state concedes that defendant's objection to the testimony should have been sustained and that without it, the evidence was insufficient to convict. We accept the concession.
Reversed.