Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

STATE v. NISWENDER

Oregon Court of Appeals.
May 29, 1986
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for new trial.

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his conviction for borrowing a game tag, ORS 497.400(2), contending that the trial court erred in denying a motion for continuance, which would have allowed the parties to secure the presence of a witness for trial. The state concedes that the trial court erred in denying defendant's request for continuance in which the state joined. Because defendant met the requirements for obtaining a continuance for the purpose of securing a witness for trial, see State v. Otten, 234 Or. 219, 223, 380 P.2d 812 (1963); State v. Birchard, 23 Or. App. 17, 21-22, 540 P.2d 1033 (1975), we agree that it was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny a continuance. State v. Wolfer, 241 Or. 15, 403 P.2d 715 (1965); State v. Schroeder, 62 Or. App. 331, 339, 661 P.2d 111, rev den 295 Or. 161 (1983).

Reversed and remanded for a new trial.