egon V. Hancock, 60 Ore. App. 425; 653 P.2d 1304; 1982 Ore. App. Lexis 4132 (1982)

Case Name： Oregon v. Hancock, 60 Ore. App. 425; 653 P.2d 1304; 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 4132 (1982)

Appellant： Gordon Charles Hancock

Appellee： State of Oregon

Jurisdiction： Court of Appeals of Oregon

Procedural History： Hancock was convicted of possession of a weapon by a person committed to a penal institution and being an ex-convict in possession of a firearm in the Linn County Circuit Court. Hancock appeals the denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal to the Court of Appeals of Oregon. The court denied the motion, merged the two convictions, and the conviction on the charge is reversed and remanded for resentencing.

Substantive Facts： Hancock was an inmate of the Oregon State Penitentiary. Due to being for parole in the near future, he was granted a temporary leave from the penitentiary to search for a job. During that leave, and while living in a private residence, he was found to be in possession of a sawed-off shotgun.

Litigant Positions： Defendant, Hancock contends that he was not in the institution at the time he possessed the weapon and that and his weapons possession posed no direct threat to institutional security so his conduct is not covered by ORS 166.275. The state argues that defendant was still considered an inmate and would be an inmate until released on parole and that an inmate who is temporarily away from the institution and in possession of a weapon constitutes a threat to institutional security. Therefore, the state argues that defendant’s conduct is still covered by ORS 166.275.

Issue： Whether an inmate who living in a private residence is under the jurisdiction of penal institution of ORS 166.275?

Rules： The decision in State v. Larsen shows that being no longer in the institution or under direct custody supervision is not under the jurisdiction and ORS166.275 penalizes possession of weapons by inmates only when they are within the prison or under direct custody supervision.