State v. Garratt

885 P.2d 757, 131 Or. App. 755, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 1809
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided December 14, 1994·No. 92-07-33916; CA A78088·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from his convictions for solicitation to commit perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury. ORS 162.065; ORS 161.435; ORS 161.450. The trial court imposed a sentence of 12 months of incarceration, with 36 months of post-prison supervision, on the conspiracy count and five years of probation on the solicitation count. Defendant argues on appeal that because ORS 161.485C2)1 precludes conviction of more than one inchoate crime for conduct aimed at the culmination of the same crime, the two offenses merged as a matter of law.

Defendant did not object to the trial court’s failure to merge the two counts; however, on appeal, he argues that the error is apparent on the face of the record and requests that we exercise our discretion and review the error. ORAP 5.45(2). As the state concedes, defendant is correct that the error is one of law and is apparent on the face of the record. Particularly in view of the state’s concession, we are persuaded to exercise our discretion to review the unpreserved error. State v. Jones, 129 Or App 413, 879 P2d 881 (1994). We remand for entry of a corrected judgment imposing only one conviction and for resentencing.

Remanded for entry of a corrected judgment and resentencing.

Footnotes

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

State v. Garratt, 885 P.2d 757, 131 Or. App. 755, 1994 Ore. App. LEXIS 1809 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).

885 P.2d 757 (State v. Garratt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Scott
899 P.2d 697 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1995)