Oregon Supreme Court - February 8, 2018

by: Rankin Johnson • February 12, 2018 • no comments

Written by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA

SENTENCING-CDO FACTORS

Sentencing - CDO factors - delivery for consideration

Evidence of Boyd delivery is not sufficient to prove the CDO factor of “delivery for consideration.” The court considered text, context, and legislative history to determine that the phrase “for consideration” in ORS 475.900(1)(b) refers to a genuine executed delivery for consideration, not an attempted or constructive delivery. C.f. State v. Boyd, 92 Or App 51, 54, rev den, 307 Or 77 (1988). Because the evidence did not prove a genuine delivery for consideration, the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s MJOA as to that factor. Remanded for resentencing. State v. Villagomez, 362 Or 390 (2018) (Walters, J.)