State v. Halfmoon

346 Or. App. 66

• Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
• Decided: December 24, 2025
• Docket: A186406
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

66 December 24, 2025 No. 1112

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JAMES BRIAN HALFMOON, JR., Defendant-Appellant. Malheur County Circuit Court 24CR53731, 24CR59311; A186406 (Control), A186407

Erin K. Landis, Judge. Submitted November 14, 2025. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Neil F. Byl, Deputy Public Defender, Oregon Public Defense Commission, filed the brief for appellant. Lauren P. Robertson, Assistant Attorney General, waived appearance for respondent. Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge. LAGESEN, C. J. Affirmed. Nonprecedential Memo Op: 346 Or App 66 (2025) 67

LAGESEN, C. J. In this consolidated case, defendant appeals judg- ments of conviction for giving false information to a peace officer in connection with a citation or warrant, ORS 162.385 (Case No. 24CR53731) and theft in the second degree, ORS 164.045 (Case No. 24CR59311). In Case No. 24CR59311, defendant was also charged with disorderly conduct, ORS 166.025, which was dismissed as part of a plea agreement. Defendant was sentenced, as agreed by the parties, to 90 days in jail with credit for time served, which included time served concurrently on other pending cases. Appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 311 Or 434, 814 P2d 1069 (1991). The brief does not contain a Section B. See ORAP 5.90(1)(b). We affirm.1 Having reviewed the record, including the trial court file, the transcript of the hearings, and the Balfour brief, and taking into account our statutorily circumscribed authority to review, see ORS 138.105, we have identified no arguably meritorious issues. See ORS 138.105(5) (“The appellate court has no authority to review the validity of the defendant’s plea of guilty or no contest, or a conviction based on the defendant’s plea of guilty or no contest[.]”); ORS 138.105(9) (“The appellate court has no authority to review any part of a sentence resulting from a stipulated sentenc- ing agreement between the state and the defendant.”). Affirmed.

1 As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel.