State v. David
552 P.2d 272, 26 Or. App. 359
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided August 2, 1976·No. No. C 75-09-2796 Cr, CA 5628·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Counsel have stipulated:
"It appearing to counsel for appellant and respondent herein that defendant-appellant’s sentence as a dangerous offender is erroneous, in that the judgment order herein imposes an additional sentence for being a dangerous offender, instead of enhancing the sentence for the underlying offense:
"IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between counsel for appellant and respondent that the judgment herein should be vacated and the cause remanded for resentencing.”
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
State v. David, 552 P.2d 272, 26 Or. App. 359 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
552 P.2d 272 (State v. David) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. David
561 P.2d 189 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1977)