State v. Crawford

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Crawford

750 P.2d 537, 89 Or. App. 675, 1988 Ore. App. LEXIS 247

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedMarch 2, 1988

DocketCR86-360; CA A44610

StatusPublished

This text of 750 P.2d 537 (State v. Crawford) 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. Crawford, 750 P.2d 537, 89 Or. App. 675, 1988 Ore. App. LEXIS 247 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his convictions for theft in the first degree, ORS 164.055, and unlawful possession of a firearm, ORS 166.250. We affirm the convictions but vacate the sentences and remand for resentencing.

Defendant’s first and second assignments of error have no merit and do not require discussion. In his third assignment, he contends, and the state concedes, that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences without stating its reasons for doing so and without making the special findings on the record as required by ORS 137.122. We agree. State v. Ramirez, 86 Or App 5, 737 P2d 976 (1987).

Convictions affirmed; sentences vacated; remanded for resentencing.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his convictions for theft in the first degree, ORS 164.055, and unlawful possession of a firearm, ORS 166.250. We affirm the convictions but vacate the sentences and remand for resentencing.

Defendant’s first and second assignments of error have no merit and do not require discussion. In his third assignment, he contends, and the state concedes, that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences without stating its reasons for doing so and without making the special findings on the record as required by ORS 137.122. We agree. State v. Ramirez, 86 Or App 5, 737 P2d 976 (1987).

Convictions affirmed; sentences vacated; remanded for resentencing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

750 P.2d 537, 89 Or. App. 675, 1988 Ore. App. LEXIS 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-crawford-orctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack