Oregon Appellate Court, September 25, 2019
by: Rankin Johnson • September 26, 2019 • no comments
(Created page with "<summary hidden> SENTENCING - Duration of PPS SENTENCING - Interplay of sentencing guidelines SENTENCING - Court-appointed attorney fees </summary> '''Summarized by Rankin Joh...") |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by one user not shown) | |||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Trial court plainly erred by imposing longer PPS term than provided for by the guidelines. Reversed and remanded. | Trial court plainly erred by imposing longer PPS term than provided for by the guidelines. Reversed and remanded. | ||
| − | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/24818/download#page=1&zoom=auto State v. Cunningham] 299 Or App | + | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/24818/download#page=1&zoom=auto State v. Cunningham] 299 Or App 523 (September 25, 2019) (Ortega) (Clatsop County, McIntosh) |
'''SENTENCING - Interplay of sentencing guidelines''' | '''SENTENCING - Interplay of sentencing guidelines''' | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
Trial court erred by imposing court-appointed attorney fees following findings that defendant would be healthy and try to work following his 25-year prison term. Reversed. | Trial court erred by imposing court-appointed attorney fees following findings that defendant would be healthy and try to work following his 25-year prison term. Reversed. | ||
| − | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/24819/download#page=1&zoom=auto State v. Smith] 299 Or App | + | [https://cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/pdf.js/web/viewer.html?file=/digital/api/collection/p17027coll5/id/24819/download#page=1&zoom=auto State v. Smith] 299 Or App 536 (September 25, 2019) (Per curiam) (Marion County, Leith) |
{{wl-publish: 2019-09-26 10:56:17 -0700 | Rankinjohnsonpdx@gmail.com:Rankin Johnson IV }} | {{wl-publish: 2019-09-26 10:56:17 -0700 | Rankinjohnsonpdx@gmail.com:Rankin Johnson IV }} | ||
Latest revision as of 15:55, October 2, 2019
Summarized by Rankin Johnson, OCDLA
SENTENCING - Duration of PPS
Trial court plainly erred by imposing longer PPS term than provided for by the guidelines. Reversed and remanded.
State v. Cunningham 299 Or App 523 (September 25, 2019) (Ortega) (Clatsop County, McIntosh)
SENTENCING - Interplay of sentencing guidelines
Trial court plainly erred by failing to use 200-percent rule. Reversed and remanded.
The state argued that the crimes were not plainly part of the same criminal episode. The Court of Appeals observed that the trial court applied the shift-to-I rule, which only applies when there are multiple offenses from the same criminal episode. Following that holding, the court was obligated also to apply the 200-percent rule.
State v. Decleve 299 Or App 528 (September 25, 2019) (Powers) (Lincoln County, Branford)
SENTENCING - Court-appointed attorney fees
Trial court erred by imposing court-appointed attorney fees following findings that defendant would be healthy and try to work following his 25-year prison term. Reversed.
State v. Smith 299 Or App 536 (September 25, 2019) (Per curiam) (Marion County, Leith)
