Maintenance script: Importing text file

2012-12-21T00:21:21Z

Importing text file

New page

''Read the full article for details about the following new cases:''
* There's No Such Thing as Merger for Sentencing
* Repeat Property Offender - A Court-Martial is not a Prior Conviction

===There's No Such Thing as Merger for Sentencing===

Merger is merger of conviction. There is no merger for sentencing:

<blockquote>

''The judgment's language which purports to "merge" those counts "[f]or the purposes of imposing sentence" does not serve to merge defendant's guilty verdicts''

</blockquote>

The state agreed that 12 counts of negotiating a bad check should merge into 3 counts of theft where the thefts were merely aggregations of the negotiating charges. But the state argued that the defendant got what he wanted: merger for sentencing. The court corrects the plain error despite the lack of objection because the error is grave and the state has no interest in convicting a defendant twice for the same crime.
''[http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A140603.pdf State v. Earls]''

===Repeat Property Offender - A Court-Martial is not a Prior Conviction===

A military court-martial conviction is not a "Federal" conviction under 137.717, the repeat property offender law. Courts martial exist pursuant to the military authority of Article I of the Constitution. Federal courts exist pursuant to Article III and, as such, are required to follow such rules as trial by jury and grand jury indictment. Stated more succinctly, a Federal conviction under ORS 137.717 is one that is imposed by an Article III court.
[http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/A140603.pdf ''State v. Earls'']

{{wl-publish: 2011-11-15 21:00:00 -0800 | abassos }}

Blog:Case Reviews/Oregon Appellate Court 11-16-11 - Revision history

Maintenance script: Importing text file