State v. Daniel

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Daniel

836 P.2d 1366, 115 Or. App. 177, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 1712

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedSeptember 9, 1992

Docket90P-3058; CA A68475

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 836 P.2d 1366 (State v. Daniel) 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. Daniel, 836 P.2d 1366, 115 Or. App. 177, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 1712 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

*178 PER CURIAM

Defendant pled guilty to manslaughter in the first degree with a firearm. ORS 163.118(1)(a); ORS 161.610. She challenges the part of her sentence that requires her to repay $5,000 for court-appointed attorney fees. We affirm.

Defendant argues that the court did not inquire into her financial resources or her present or future ability to pay attorney fees, as required by ORS 161.665(3). 1 The state contends that defendant did not object and cannot, therefore, raise the issue on appeal.

Under ORS 161.665(1),(2), the court was authorized to impose payment of court appointed attorney fees as part of costs. On its face, defendant’s sentence is within that authority and any error is not “apparent on the face of the record.” ORAP 5.45(2); see State v. Brown, 310 Or 347, 800 P2d 259 (1990). Defendant did not object to the trial court’s failure to comply with ORS 161.665(3), and we decline to address her argument for the first time on appeal.

Affirmed.

1

ORS 161.665(3) provides:

“The court shall not sentence a defendant to pay costs unless the defendant is or may be able to pay them. In determining the amount and method of payment of costs, the court shall take account of the financial resources of the defendant and the nature of the burden that payment of costs will impose."

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