State v. Crow
This text of 418 P.3d 779 (State v. Crow) 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
*197Defendant appeals a judgment revoking her probation. Defendant assigns error to the trial court's imposition of $110 in court-appointed attorney fees and a $25 probation-violation fee. Defendant argues that the trial court erred when it ordered her to pay those fees because the court entered them in the judgment without first announcing in court that it would impose them. Defendant requests that we remand the case for resentencing. The state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing attorney fees for the first time in the judgment. However, the state argues that, because it agrees with defendant that that error requires a remand, we need not reach defendant's assignment of error to the court's imposition of the probation-violation fee. We agree with and accept the state's concession regarding the attorney fees and, accordingly, reverse the imposition of those fees. See State v. White ,
Portion of judgment imposing court-appointed attorney fees reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
418 P.3d 779, 292 Or. App. 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-crow-orctapp-2018.