State v. Bumgarner
This text of 209 P.3d 857 (State v. Bumgarner) 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.
Opinion
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Kevin Mitchell BUMGARNER, Defendant-Appellant.
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Erika L. Hadlock, Acting Solicitor General, and Paul L. Smith, Assistant Attorney-in-Charge, Criminal Appeals, for petition.
Before WOLLHEIM, Presiding Judge, and ARMSTRONG, Judge, and SERCOMBE, Judge.
PER CURIAM.
The state petitions this court to reconsider its decision in State v. Bumgarner, 219 Or.App. 617, 184 P.3d 1143, rev. den., 345 Or. 175, 190 P.3d 1237 (2008), cert. den., ___ U.S. ___ 129 S.Ct. 927, 173 L.Ed.2d 112 (2009). In Bumgarner, we affirmed defendant's convictions but remanded for resentencing. The state now contends that, in light of Oregon v. Ice, 555 U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 711, 172 L.Ed.2d 517 (2009), we erred in remanding for resentencing. We agree and, accordingly, modify our opinion and affirm.
Reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified; affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
209 P.3d 857, 229 Or. App. 92, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-bumgarner-orctapp-2009.