State v. Heiller

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Heiller

809 P.2d 730, 106 Or. App. 770, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 611

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedApril 24, 1991

Docket88CR-2508; CA A61025

StatusPublished

This text of 809 P.2d 730 (State v. Heiller) 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. Heiller, 809 P.2d 730, 106 Or. App. 770, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 611 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant challenges the consecutive sentences imposed after his conviction on five counts. Defendant’s remaining assignments of error either were not preserved or are without merit. He argues that the trial court failed to find that the circumstance came within ORS 137.123(4)(a) or (b). We agree. The only reason given by the trial court for the consecutive sentences is that, but for the mistakes and “timidness” of some of the witnesses, defendant would have been convicted of more than what was presented to the court. That statement does not show that the requirements of ORS 137.123(4) were met. See State v. Racicot, 106 Or App 557, 809 P2d 726 (1991).

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant challenges the consecutive sentences imposed after his conviction on five counts. Defendant’s remaining assignments of error either were not preserved or are without merit. He argues that the trial court failed to find that the circumstance came within ORS 137.123(4)(a) or (b). We agree. The only reason given by the trial court for the consecutive sentences is that, but for the mistakes and “timidness” of some of the witnesses, defendant would have been convicted of more than what was presented to the court. That statement does not show that the requirements of ORS 137.123(4) were met. See State v. Racicot, 106 Or App 557, 809 P2d 726 (1991).

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

809 P.2d 730, 106 Or. App. 770, 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-heiller-orctapp-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack