State v. Drummond

810 P.2d 413, 107 Or. App. 247, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 787
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedMay 15, 1991
Docket8903-31113; CA A62660
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 810 P.2d 413 (State v. Drummond) 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. Drummond, 810 P.2d 413, 107 Or. App. 247, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 787 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his conviction for delivery of a controlled substance and two convictions for possession of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992. Defendant contends that one of the convictions for possession should have merged with the delivery conviction, because they were both part of the same transaction. ORS 161.062(1); State v. Garcia, 104 Or App 453, 801 P2d 894 (1990), rev den 311 Or 150 (1991); State v. Finn, 79 Or App 439, 719 P2d 898 (1986). We accept the state’s concession of error.

Defendant’s remaining assignment of error is without merit.

Convictions and sentences for delivery of a controlled substance and possession of a controlled substance (cocaine) affirmed; conviction and sentence for possession of a controlled substance (marijuana) vacated.

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

Related

State v. Sargent
822 P.2d 726 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1991)
State v. Heneghan
816 P.2d 1175 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
810 P.2d 413, 107 Or. App. 247, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-drummond-orctapp-1991.