Sanchez v. Schiedler

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Sanchez v. Schiedler

145 P.3d 277, 208 Or. App. 668, 2006 Ore. App. LEXIS 1573

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedOctober 11, 2006

DocketCV010206; A122161

StatusPublished

This text of 145 P.3d 277 (Sanchez v. Schiedler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sanchez v. Schiedler, 145 P.3d 277, 208 Or. App. 668, 2006 Ore. App. LEXIS 1573 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Petitioner appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing, in part, that he received inadequate assistance of counsel in the underlying criminal proceeding, in which he received sentences greater than that allowed by law. On appeal, the state concedes that the post-conviction court should have granted relief on that claim of inadequate assistance of counsel. The parties assert, and we agree, that the sentences in the underlying criminal proceeding do not comport with the Oregon Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Davis, 315 Or 484, 847 P2d 834 (1993), and that petitioner is entitled to resentencing. We thus accept the state’s concession. We reject without discussion petitioner’s remaining assignments of error.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM

Petitioner appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing, in part, that he received inadequate assistance of counsel in the underlying criminal proceeding, in which he received sentences greater than that allowed by law. On appeal, the state concedes that the post-conviction court should have granted relief on that claim of inadequate assistance of counsel. The parties assert, and we agree, that the sentences in the underlying criminal proceeding do not comport with the Oregon Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Davis, 315 Or 484, 847 P2d 834 (1993), and that petitioner is entitled to resentencing. We thus accept the state’s concession. We reject without discussion petitioner’s remaining assignments of error.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

145 P.3d 277, 208 Or. App. 668, 2006 Ore. App. LEXIS 1573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanchez-v-schiedler-orctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack