State v. Robleto

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1). Submitted September 2, affirmed October 26, 2022

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. MIGUEL ROBLETO, Defendant-Appellant. Lane County Circuit Court 21VI82213; A177526

Bradley A. Cascagnette, Judge. Miguel Robleto filed the brief pro se. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Emily N. Snook, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and Kamins, Judge. KAMINS, J. Affirmed.

560 State v. Robleto

KAMINS, J. Defendant appeals from a judgment finding him guilty of the violation of failure to obey traffic control devices, ORS 811.265, and challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the trial court’s findings. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, as is required by our standard of review, we conclude that a reasonable trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the violation had been proved. See State v. Hashoosh, 306 Or App 467, 468, 473 P3d 147 (2020) (stating the standard of review for traffic violation cases). Specifically, there was sufficient evi- dence to support the finding that when the traffic light was red, defendant failed to stop his vehicle before crossing the stop line, and we are not permitted to reweigh that evidence on appeal. See ORS 811.260(7) (requiring that a “driver fac- ing a steady circular red signal light alone shall stop at a clearly marked stop line”). Affirmed.