Opinion ID: 1430376
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: The concluding error

Text: The conclusion mixes up all the errors into one big error: it decides a factual dispute as a matter of law. But see State v. Krummacher, 269 Or. 125, 523 P.2d 1009 (1974). The evidence is that: (1) defendant's non-resident operator's privilege was suspended indefinitely; (2) that eight months later she was driving an automobile; (3) that she said she had appeared in court on a citation during the year before. The majority concludes as a matter of law that no rational person could find that defendant's privilege was suspended at the time of her apprehension. This conclusion leaves me and probably most of the trial judges in this state outside that favored category. This case demonstrates anew that the right answer is usually straightforward and that tortuous reasoning is usually erroneous. Accordingly, I dissent.