I haven't read the case file, but chances are the jury did convicted Morales based on correct theory (that she was unconscious). So hopefully they'll do so again.
Also, how did the guy get into the house? Did the boyfriend allow this?
While it's not ideal, it's actually evidence the legal system works: A prosecutor used the wrong law, the trial court applied the law improperly, and both got busted on it.
This guy will now be retried on the correct theory and almost certainly convicted. He will not walk on double jeopardy.
2 Oregon Laws:
A) Murder
B) Murder with a Blue Car
Everyone watches defendant murder someone on purpose with his truck. He yells "I'm going to kill you with this truck and I've been planning to do so for months."
Prosecutor stupidly charges Defendant with Murder with a Blue Car. Jury convicts. Defendant appeals and says "there was no evidence I murdered with a BLUE CAR." Appeals court says "you're right. The state has to prove you used a blue car to convict you of Murder with a Blue Car. You get a new trial."
New trial: Prosecutor 2 charges Defendant with Murder. Defendant is convicted of Murder.
Maybe the state legislature takes Murder by Blue Car off the books, but more likely, every other prosecutor simply charges Murder as they have been doing and ignores a basically superfluous law with unnecessary extra elements to prove.
Also, how did the guy get into the house? Did the boyfriend allow this?
While it's not ideal, it's actually evidence the legal system works: A prosecutor used the wrong law, the trial court applied the law improperly, and both got busted on it.
This guy will now be retried on the correct theory and almost certainly convicted. He will not walk on double jeopardy.
2 Oregon Laws:
A) Murder
B) Murder with a Blue Car
Everyone watches defendant murder someone on purpose with his truck. He yells "I'm going to kill you with this truck and I've been planning to do so for months."
Prosecutor stupidly charges Defendant with Murder with a Blue Car. Jury convicts. Defendant appeals and says "there was no evidence I murdered with a BLUE CAR." Appeals court says "you're right. The state has to prove you used a blue car to convict you of Murder with a Blue Car. You get a new trial."
New trial: Prosecutor 2 charges Defendant with Murder. Defendant is convicted of Murder.
Maybe the state legislature takes Murder by Blue Car off the books, but more likely, every other prosecutor simply charges Murder as they have been doing and ignores a basically superfluous law with unnecessary extra elements to prove.
FIN.