
    Argued and submitted March 31, 1999,
    affirmed March 8,
    petition for review denied May 31, 2000(330 Or 361)
    STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. STANFORD LELAND ENDRES, Appellant.
    
    (96-CR-0275-33; CA A100141)
    998 P2d 752
    Jessie Wm. Barton, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was David E. Groom, Public Defender.
    Anne L. Cottrell, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.
    Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Deits, Chief Judge, and Armstrong, Judge.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from his convictions of two counts of second-degree assault, ORS 163.175, and nine other crimes. We affirm. Defendant contends, in his first assignment of error, that the trial court’s instructions on the assault charges were incorrect, in that they did not apprise the jury that the “knowledge” element of the offenses required a finding that defendant knew that his acts would likely result in physical injury or serious physical injury to the victims. Assuming that defendant’s argument was preserved, it finds support in our opinion in State v. Barnes, 150 Or App 128, 945 P2d 627 (1997). However, after this case was argued, the Supreme Court reversed our decision in Barnes on the point in question. State v. Barnes, 329 Or 327, 986 P2d 1160 (1999). Under that decision, the trial court’s instructions here were not erroneous.

Defendant makes one further assignment, which does not warrant discussion.

Affirmed.  