From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Foster

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 4, 1983
62 Or. App. 298 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

81-333C; CA A22845

Argued and submitted August 2, 1982 Resubmitted in banc March 9, 1983

Affirmed March 16, 1983 Reconsideration denied June 10, petition for review allowed October 4, 1983 ( 295 Or. 730) See 296 Or. 174, 674 P.2d 587 (1983)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Klamath County, Ted Abram, Judge.

Marilyn C. McManus, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.

Stephen F. Peifer, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and William F. Gary, Solicitor General, Salem.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


Defendant was convicted of felony murder, first degree kidnapping and criminal conspiracy. The latter charges were merged into the murder conviction for purposes of sentencing. Defendant appeals from the resulting judgment.

One of the state's principal witnesses was defendant's accomplice, Walker. Before the trial commenced and again during Walker's testimony, defendant's attorney sought rulings from the court that no mention could be made of the fact that Walker was required to take a polygraph examination as a condition of his plea agreement with the state and that defendant could impeach Walker on the basis of the plea agreement without opening the door to the state's introduction of the polygraph condition as rehabilitation evidence. The court indicated that it was inclined to admit evidence of the polygraph.

On cross-examination of the accomplice, defendant declined to ask him about the plea agreement. Had he done so, and had the polygraph condition of the agreement then been received, defendant would have had the opportunity to argue on appeal that the admission of that evidence was error. State v. Middleton, 61 Or. App. 680, 658 P.2d 555 (1983). Although the court indicated how it would rule, it was never actually called upon to make a ruling. There is no error requiring reversal.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Foster

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 4, 1983
62 Or. App. 298 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

State v. Foster

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. KENNETH FOSTER, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 4, 1983

Citations

62 Or. App. 298 (Or. Ct. App. 1983)
660 P.2d 200

Citing Cases

State v. Foster

Appeal from Klamath County Circuit Court, Ted Abram, Judge. 62 Or. App. 298, 660 P.2d 200 (1983). Marilyn C.…

State v. Johnson

The court was not presented with the necessity to rule finally on the admissibility of the prior convictions,…