Oregon Appellate Ct - Oct 19, 2016

Revision as of 07:03, October 21, 2016

Vindictive Sentencing

State v. Bradley, 281 Or App 696 (2016) (Tookey, J.)

Burglary

State v. Gordon, 281 Or App 654 (2016) (Armstrong, P.J.)

Compensatory Fine

State v. Nichols, 281 Or App 658 (2016) (Sercombe, P.J.)

Denial of Continuance -

State v. Stull, 281 Or App 662 (2016) (Egan, J.)

Plea Agreements -

State v. Thomas, 281 Or App 685 (2016) (Devore, J.)

Civil Commitment -

State v. S.R.J., 281 Or App 741 (2016) (Flynn, J.) (Lagesen, J., dissenting)

Juvenile Dependency - Appeal Dismissed as Moot

The court dismisses father's appeal of a juvenile court wardship judgment as moot because the juvenile court terminated the wardship. Father contended that he would continue to suffer consequences and that the case is therefore not moot. Specifically, father contended that the judgment may prevent him from volunteering at his other children's schools or coaching their teams, and that there is a social stigma associated with the order. The court rejects those concerns as a basis for continuing the appeal because juvenile court judgments are confidential and it is speculative that the judgment against father would ever be discovered and adversely affect father in the way he claims.

DHS v. S.M.S., 281 Or App 720 (2016) (Garrett, J.)

Search & Seizure - Search Incident to Arrest was Lawful

The court concludes that police lawfully searched defendant's car incident to arrest for possession of methamphetamine, even though defendant had already been removed from the car and arrested for an unrelated probation violation when police developed probable cause to arrest for possession. Defendant was stopped for multiple traffic infractions. The officer noted that defendant seemed nervous and was sweating profusely, which the officer believed were signs that defendant was under the influence of a stimulant. The officer learned of the probation violation and arrested defendant. After defendant was removed from the car, the officer saw a baggie containing a white substance. Police then searched the car and found additional evidence. The court rejects defendant's argument that he no longer had control of the car or its contents, so a search of the car was outside of the scope of arrest. The court explains that because police were searching incident to arrest for evidence of the crime of arrest, they were permitted to search the car so long as the search was reasonable in time, scope, and intensity. Here, the search was reasonable in time, scope, and intensity because it occurred immediately after the officer developed probable cause and defendant had only recently exited the car.

State v. Delfino, 281 Or App 725 (2016) (Flynn, J.)

Juvenile Delinquency - Court is Required to Make Specific Findings Why Out-of-Home Placement is Necessary

The court concludes that the juvenile court is required by ORS 419C.626(3)(a) to make specific findings as to why continued out-of-home placement is necessary, and here, the juvenile court's findings were sufficient. Youth challenged an order that continued him in OYA custody, instead of a placement with his grandmother. In making that order, the juvenile court found that there was a lack of available sex offender treatment options in the area and that youth still needed treatment. The juvenile court further found that youth would present a threat to the community if he were to live with his grandmother. Youth challenged the ruling, arguing that the juvenile court was required to make a specific factual finding that out-of-home custody was necessary. The court agrees that specific findings, not inferences, are required, but those findings must show why it is necessary. Here the juvenile court's findings, taken together, did that.

State v. D.J., 281 Or App 730 (2016) (Flynn, J.)

Per Curiam - Error to Impose Restitution and Suspend SNAP Benefits

In this prosecution for unlawfully disposing of food stamp benefits and theft, the state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing $818.53 in restitution when the record supported an award of only $150.77. Additionally, the state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing a lifetime suspension of SNAP benefits because that ruling was based on the trial court's erroneous determination of the restitution amount as over $500.

State v. Keller, 281 Or App 774 (2016) (per curiam)

Per Curiam - Sentence Exceeded Statutory Maximum

The trial court sentenced defendant to 75 months in prison and 120 months post-prison supervision for first-degree sex abuse. Because the maximum term for that offense, including both incarceration and PPS, cannot exceed 120 months, the trial court erred.

State v. Evans, 281 Or App 771 (2016) (per curiam)

Per Curiam - Reversing Mandatory State Amt and Affirming Attorney Fee Judgment

There was no statutory authority for the trial court to impose a $60 "Mandatory State Amt." The court affirms the attorney fee award because the trial court did not commit plain error. There was evidence that defendant possessed assets and had only a jail sentence.

State v. Stier, 281 Or App 768 (2016) (per curiam)

Per Curiam - Reversing Attorney Fee Judgment

The court concludes that the trial court plainly erred in imposing $460 in attorney fees because there was no evidence in the record that defendant had the ability to pay and it would significantly burden a person without means, especially in light of the other $1,500 in fines that defendant owed.

State v. Hollamon, 281 Or App 766 (2016) (per curiam)

Per Curiam - Reversing Attorney Fee Judgment

Because defendant was sentenced to a lengthy prison term and there was no evidence that he had financial resources, the court concludes the trial court plainly erred in imposing $6,000 in attorney fees and the court grants its discretion to correct the error.

State v. Maipi, 281 Or App 764 (2016) (per curiam)