Oregon v. Crow
Oregon Court of Appeals
294 Or. App. 88 (2018)
- Written by Brianna Pine, JD
Facts
Kandi Crow (defendant) had previously been convicted of second-degree animal neglect involving dogs and miniature horses. Later, after being found in possession of several miniature horses, cats, and a dog, Crow was charged and convicted of 13 separate counts of unlawful possession of an animal by a person previously convicted of animal neglect. Crow appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in entering separate convictions for each animal. She claimed that the statute was meant to protect the public as a whole and that the public, therefore, was a single collective victim. The State of Oregon (plaintiff) responded that the separate convictions were justified because the legislature intended for each animal unlawfully possessed to be considered a separate victim.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Tookey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
