the trial court to choose among several legally correct outcomes. State v. Rogers, 330 Or 282, 312, 4 P3d 1261 (2000). Although we review the trial court’s decision for abuse of discretion, a court can “abuse” its discretion in different ways, depending on the circumstances; thus, the term has no hard and fast meaning. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Jacobson, 164 Or App 37, 45-46, 988 P2d 442 (1999). A familiar but nonexclusive test for determining whether discretion has been abused is whether the decision reached was “clearly against reason and evidence.” Id. A court abuses its discretion, for example, when the relevant evidence is undisputed and does not rationally support the decision the court made. See Lambert v. American Dream Homes Corp., 148 Or App 371, 377, 939 P2d 661 (1997) (<HOLDING>). That is the case here. At trial, defendant
recognizing that although there were no limits placed on the defense counsels preparation it was surely reasonable for the defense to assume that there was no reason to present argument or evidence directed at whether the death penalty was either appropriate or permissible where the prosecution never argued for the application of the death penalty recognizing that where material facts are undisputed the court only decides the application of relevant law holding that where the relevant facts were undisputed the only question for review was whether there was any evidence or reason to support a dismissal for want of prosecution holding question of law applied to undisputed facts reviewed de novo recognizing the issue may be decided as a question of law if the facts are undisputed and support only one inference