State v. Holbrook

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed Seth Thomas Holbrook’s convictions for stalking and second-degree trespass. The court held that sufficient evidence supported the stalking conviction because a reasonable juror could find that two incidents on August 3 constituted repeated unwanted contacts causing objectively reasonable apprehension for the victim’s safety. A concurrence agreed with the affirmance but identified a different point during the afternoon incident at which the second qualifying contact was established.

Holdings

1. The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the state, was sufficient for a reasonable juror to find defendant guilty of stalking beyond a reasonable doubt.
2. The July 27 visit did not qualify as a stalking contact because no reasonable juror could find that D had a reasonable apprehension for her or her children's safety or that it was objectively reasonable for her to have been alarmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient for a rational juror to find beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant committed stalking under ORS 163.732.
2. Whether the July 27 and August 3 contacts, particularly the two August 3 incidents, constituted repeated unwanted contacts causing objectively reasonable alarm and reasonable apprehension for D's or her children's safety.
3. Whether the trial court erred by denying defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal on the stalking charge.

Disposition

affirmed