State v. Grimsley

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Grimsley

454 P.3d 850, 301 Or. App. 632

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedDecember 26, 2019

DocketA167333

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 454 P.3d 850 (State v. Grimsley) 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. Grimsley, 454 P.3d 850, 301 Or. App. 632 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Submitted December 3, affirmed December 26, 2019

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ROBERT ALEXANDER GRIMSLEY, Defendant-Appellant. Douglas County Circuit Court 15CR11551; A167333 454 P3d 850

Frances Elaine Burge, Judge. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Andrew D. Robinson, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the opening brief for appellant. Robert Grimsley filed the supplemental and reply briefs pro se. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and Powers, Judge, and Sercombe, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM Affirmed. Cite as 301 Or App 632 (2019) 633

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals a judgment revoking his pro- bation, assigning error to the trial court’s imposition of a 64-month term of incarceration, to which defendant previ- ously had stipulated under a plea agreement. ORS 138.105(9), however, precludes us from reviewing that assignment of error. State v. Davis-McCoy, 300 Or App 326, 330, 454 P3d 48 (2019) (holding that ORS 138.105(9) bars review of those portions of a sentence imposed pursuant to a stipulation). In a pro se supplemental brief, defendant challenges the merits of the court’s revocation decision, contending that the court erred in finding that he violated the terms of his probation. We reject that contention without further discussion. Affirmed.

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

Submitted December 3, affirmed December 26, 2019

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ROBERT ALEXANDER GRIMSLEY, Defendant-Appellant. Douglas County Circuit Court 15CR11551; A167333 454 P3d 850

Frances Elaine Burge, Judge. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Andrew D. Robinson, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the opening brief for appellant. Robert Grimsley filed the supplemental and reply briefs pro se. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and Powers, Judge, and Sercombe, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM Affirmed. Cite as 301 Or App 632 (2019) 633

PER CURIAM Defendant appeals a judgment revoking his pro- bation, assigning error to the trial court’s imposition of a 64-month term of incarceration, to which defendant previ- ously had stipulated under a plea agreement. ORS 138.105(9), however, precludes us from reviewing that assignment of error. State v. Davis-McCoy, 300 Or App 326, 330, 454 P3d 48 (2019) (holding that ORS 138.105(9) bars review of those portions of a sentence imposed pursuant to a stipulation). In a pro se supplemental brief, defendant challenges the merits of the court’s revocation decision, contending that the court erred in finding that he violated the terms of his probation. We reject that contention without further discussion. Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

454 P.3d 850, 301 Or. App. 632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-grimsley-orctapp-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack