State v. Austin

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Austin

67 P.3d 435, 187 Or. App. 427, 2003 Ore. App. LEXIS 568

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedApril 24, 2003

Docket00C54936; A114320

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 67 P.3d 435 (State v. Austin) 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

State v. Austin, 67 P.3d 435, 187 Or. App. 427, 2003 Ore. App. LEXIS 568 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was found guilty except for insanity of the crimes of attempted murder and first-degree burglary and received consecutive commitment terms to the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) totaling 40 years. This case presents the question of whether a total PSRB commitment term for multiple offenses, imposed pursuant to ORS 161.327(1), may equal the maximum sentence that a person found guilty except for insanity could otherwise have received for the offenses committed, including sentences imposed consecutively. We have decided that question adversely to defendant’s position in State v. Brooks, 187 Or App 388, 67 P3d 426 (2003). In this case, unlike in Brooks, defendant does not challenge the adequacy of the trial court’s findings in support of the commitment terms imposed. The trial court correctly imposed consecutive commitment terms under these circumstances.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant was found guilty except for insanity of the crimes of attempted murder and first-degree burglary and received consecutive commitment terms to the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) totaling 40 years. This case presents the question of whether a total PSRB commitment term for multiple offenses, imposed pursuant to ORS 161.327(1), may equal the maximum sentence that a person found guilty except for insanity could otherwise have received for the offenses committed, including sentences imposed consecutively. We have decided that question adversely to defendant’s position in State v. Brooks, 187 Or App 388, 67 P3d 426 (2003). In this case, unlike in Brooks, defendant does not challenge the adequacy of the trial court’s findings in support of the commitment terms imposed. The trial court correctly imposed consecutive commitment terms under these circumstances.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

67 P.3d 435, 187 Or. App. 427, 2003 Ore. App. LEXIS 568, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-austin-orctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack