State v. King

Summary

The Oregon Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of homicide charges brought against Trevin Michael King after the victim of an earlier assault and robbery died from his injuries. The court held that when a victim’s death is reasonably foreseeable to the prosecutor, and neither the plea agreement nor negotiations address reprosecution if the victim dies, a contractual default rule requires the state to disclose that it may bring later homicide charges. Because the state did not make that disclosure, the plea agreement barred reprosecution.

Holdings

1. In the absence of a statute or plea agreement specifically addressing the issue, a contractual default rule applies when the victim's death is reasonably foreseeable to the prosecutor and neither the plea negotiations nor the plea agreement addresses reprosecution following the victim's death. If the state intends to reserve the right to reprosecute for homicide, it must disclose that intention as part of the plea deal.
2. Neither ORS 135.405 nor ORS 135.425 precludes a contractual default rule governing an omission concerning future homicide prosecution when the victim's death was reasonably foreseeable to the state.
3. The trial court properly dismissed the homicide indictment because the state knew that the victim's death was reasonably foreseeable, intended to pursue homicide charges after the death, and failed to disclose or reserve that right during plea negotiations or in the plea agreement.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a plea agreement that is silent about future homicide prosecution bars reprosecution when the prosecutor reasonably foresaw that the victim might die.
2. Whether Oregon statutes governing plea agreements preclude a contractual default rule requiring the state to disclose an intended reservation of the right to bring later homicide charges.
3. Whether the trial court properly dismissed the homicide indictment based on the plea agreement.

Disposition

affirmed