Per’s client was charged with felony criminal mischief for having gone onto a vacant neighboring property to lower a culvert in an effort to reduce flooding. The jury rejected the felony charge, but found the defendant guilty of misdemeanor criminal mischief based on the theory that he acted “recklessly.” However, the Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the conviction, agreeing with Per that the trial court improperly instructed the jury on the definition of “recklessly” in such a way that allowed the state to make improper and irrelevant arguments. On remand to the trial court, the case was dismissed pursuant to a civil compromise with the property owners. State of Oregon v Eugene Loren Davis, 252 Or App 667 (2012).
Click here for Oregon Court of Appeals Opinion
