State v. Harris
This text of 823 P.2d 452 (State v. Harris) 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.
Opinion
After defendant’s convictions for theft in the third degree and criminal trespass in the second degree, her appointed trial counsel was relieved of responsibility. Defendant requested that the trial court appoint counsel to represent her at the sentencing, but it failed to do so.
Defendant was entitled to court appointed counsel for her sentencing. ORS 135.050(5). The state concedes that the trial court did not establish on the record that defendant intelligently and competently waived her right to counsel or determine whether the interests of justice required a substitution of counsel. Therefore, defendant is entitled to be resentenced.
Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
823 P.2d 452, 111 Or. App. 106, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 213, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-harris-orctapp-1992.