Opinion ID: 1293474
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Oversight.

Text: The majority suggests that the failure to clearly indicate that no culpable mental state was required was a legislative oversight. Indeed, it may well have been. But the legislature has spoken to oversight problems [6] and specifically has limited the judiciary's curative powers. As a further reenforcement of its position of legislative oversight, the majority reckons that the Commission did not contemplate the application of the statute at issue to DUII, or other `serious traffic offenses.' 309 Or. at 370, 788 P.2d at 978. That may be, but the Committee on Judiciary, which rewrote the Oregon Vehicle Code in 1975 (to which the majority refers), did so contemplate. Of the five serious traffic offenses, two specifically provide for a culpable mental state (dangerous driving and eluding a police officer). [7]