State v. Barnes, 150 Or. App. 128

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals held that the trial court improperly instructed the jury on the knowledge element of second-degree assault under ORS 163.175(1)(a). Because the offense requires knowledge that the defendant's conduct would cause serious physical injury, an instruction defining knowledge only as awareness of the nature of the conduct was insufficient and the error was not harmless. The court affirmed the resisting-arrest conviction and reversed and remanded the second-degree assault conviction for a new trial.

Holdings

1. For second-degree assault under ORS 163.175(1)(a), which is a result offense, the jury must be instructed that the defendant acted with knowledge concerning the result—serious physical injury—not merely with awareness of the nature of the defendant's conduct.
2. The instructional error was not harmless because the instruction could have permitted the jury to convict without finding that Barnes knew his act would likely cause serious physical injury.
3. In a prosecution charged on a knowledge theory, an instruction stating that intentional conduct establishes the knowledge mental state should not be given because intent and knowledge are distinct concepts under Oregon's criminal code.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court's instruction defining knowingly solely as awareness of the nature of one's conduct adequately instructed the jury on the knowledge element of second-degree assault under ORS 163.175(1)(a), which requires knowingly causing serious physical injury.
2. Whether the instructional error was harmless.
3. Whether an instruction equating intentional conduct with the knowledge mental state was proper when the indictment alleged knowledge.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded