A Book from the Library of Defense

Oregon Appellate Court, December 1, 2021

From OCDLA Library of Defense
Jump to: navigation, search

by: Rankin Johnson • December 2, 2021 • no comments


Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA

SENTENCING - Sanction units
Importance: 2/5

Sentencing court did not plainly err by imposing too many sanction units. Affirmed.

Defendant was convicted of promoting prostitution, a felony. The court sentenced defendant to probation with 12 months' jail time. Although that sentence was erroneous, defendant did not object, possibly for tactical reasons, and the state had sought a much longer prison term. Accordingly, the court declined to exercise its discretion to correct the error.

State v. Wedebrook 316 Or App 1 (December 1, 2021) (Armstrong) (Clackamas County, Van Dyk)

Importance: 3/5

Juvenile counsel was ineffective in failing to have youth's competency evaluated before his admission to delinquent acts. Reversed.

Applying the same standard as in post-conviction, the court held that counsel had been ineffective in relying on her interactions with youth to evaluate youth's competency. That error affected the outcome of the plea process, and, accordingly, the juvenile court should have set aside the adjudication.

State v. C. L. E. 316 Or App 5 (December 1, 2021) (Lagesen) (Lane County, Conover)

Importance: 1/5

Trial court did not plainly err by finding defendant's jury waiver was 'knowing.' Affirmed.

Defendant argued that his waiver was not knowing, because he did not know that the US Supreme Court would soon decide that jury verdicts must be unanimous.

State v. Austin 316 Or App 56 (December 1, 2021) (Aoyagi) (Jackson County, Mejia)

Importance: 2/5

Post-conviction court erred in denying relief following its finding that petitioner "may" have expressed a "vague wish" to appeal. Reversed and remanded.

Even a "vague wish" to appeal must be honored. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals remanded to the post-conviction court to determine whether such a wish was expressed, and to order relief if so.

Dickerson v. Fhuere 316 Or App 62 (December 1, 2021) (Powers) (Coos County, Pruess)

RESTITUTION - Good cause to extend deadline
Importance: 2/5

Where victim sent restitution information to the prosecutor's office on the 87th day, and the prosecutor filed the restitution request on the 94th day, trial court erred in finding good cause to extend the 90-day deadline. Reversed.

The record did not explain the reason for the 87-day delay.

State v. Halfmoon 316 Or App 69 (December 1, 2021) (Kamins) (Umatilla County, Hill)

MENTAL HEALTH DEFENSES - Extreme emotional disturbance
Importance: 2/5

When defendant raised EED defense, evidence that he had been diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder was admissible as rebuttal. Affirmed.

State v. Courtier 316 Or App 121 (December 1, 2021) (Per curiam) (Multnomah County, Hodson)