State v. Conlon
This text of 813 P.2d 1132 (State v. Conlon) 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
This consolidated appeal involves two cases, two defendants and one issue. Defendants challenge their convictions for class A misdemeanors, Driving While Suspended or Revoked (DWSR), on the ground that the trial court had no statutory authority to enter the judgments under ORS 811.182(4). We reverse and remand.
Conlon’s case was tried in district court. At the close of all of the evidence, he moved for a judgment of acquittal on the misdemeanor charge. The trial court denied the motion. Manning’s case was also tried in district court. He did not move for a judgment of acquittal but, after being convicted, he objected to being sentenced for a class A misdemeanor. The trial court overruled the objection. In each case, the trial court entered a judgment against defendant for a class A misdemeanor.
ORS 811.175 makes any act of driving with a suspended or revoked license a class A traffic infraction. ORS 811.182(4) makes DWSR a class A misdemeanor, if the original suspension or revocation was for any of the enumerated reasons.1 ORS 811.182(3) makes the offense a class C felony, if the original suspension was for certain other different reasons.2
[144]*144Each defendant concedes that he drove his car on a public road while his license was suspended or revoked, thereby committing infraction DWSR. Each defendant also concedes that the underlying reasons for his suspension or revocation would be sufficient to justify conviction of a class C felony, if the case had been tried in circuit court. However, the cases were tried in district court, which does not have jurisdiction to try felonies. ORS 46.040. In addition, the state concedes that there is no evidence that either defendant’s license was suspended or revoked for any of the reasons in ORS 811.182(4), which would make the offenses misdemeanors. We agree and accept the concession. Because the district court only had authority to enter judgment for an infraction under ORS 811.175, the court erred in convicting and sentencing defendants for misdemeanor DWSR.
Reversed and remanded for entry of convictions and sentences for class A traffic infractions.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
813 P.2d 1132, 108 Or. App. 141, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 1068, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-conlon-orctapp-1991.