State v. Camel

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Camel

510 P.2d 576, 13 Or. App. 508, 1973 Ore. App. LEXIS 1201

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedMay 31, 1973

DocketNo. C-72-08-2403 Cr

StatusPublished

This text of 510 P.2d 576 (State v. Camel) 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. Camel, 510 P.2d 576, 13 Or. App. 508, 1973 Ore. App. LEXIS 1201 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PEB CUBIAM.

The only issue of substance in this criminal appeal is defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in taking into consideration at the time of sen-[509]*509fencing defendant’s prior arrest and juvenile record. The Oregon Supreme Court and this court have previously held that such is proper. See, State v. Scott, 237 Or 390, 390 P2d 328 (1964); State v. Hargon, 2 Or App 553, 470 P2d 383 (1970). Accord, Williams v. New York, 337 US 241, 69 S Ct 1079, 93 L Ed 1337 (1949). See also, ORS 419.567 (3) (a).

Affirmed.

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

PEB CUBIAM.

The only issue of substance in this criminal appeal is defendant’s contention that the trial court erred in taking into consideration at the time of sen-[509]*509fencing defendant’s prior arrest and juvenile record. The Oregon Supreme Court and this court have previously held that such is proper. See, State v. Scott, 237 Or 390, 390 P2d 328 (1964); State v. Hargon, 2 Or App 553, 470 P2d 383 (1970). Accord, Williams v. New York, 337 US 241, 69 S Ct 1079, 93 L Ed 1337 (1949). See also, ORS 419.567 (3) (a).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

510 P.2d 576, 13 Or. App. 508, 1973 Ore. App. LEXIS 1201, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-camel-orctapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack