State v. Hernandez

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Hernandez

622 P.2d 335, 50 Or. App. 175, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 2270

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJanuary 26, 1981

DocketNo. 80-26-C, CA 18354

StatusPublished

This text of 622 P.2d 335 (State v. Hernandez) 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. Hernandez, 622 P.2d 335, 50 Or. App. 175, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 2270 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

The state concedes that the trial court erred in failing to obtain an updated presentence investigation before imposing the sentence. Although the court determined that a supplement was unnecessary, and the district attorney appeared to concur in that conclusion, defendant did not sign a written waiver. On the contrary, defendant voiced an express desire to have an additional presentence report submitted to the court. Accordingly, the case is remanded for resentencing.

Remanded for resentencing.

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

PER CURIAM

The state concedes that the trial court erred in failing to obtain an updated presentence investigation before imposing the sentence. Although the court determined that a supplement was unnecessary, and the district attorney appeared to concur in that conclusion, defendant did not sign a written waiver. On the contrary, defendant voiced an express desire to have an additional presentence report submitted to the court. Accordingly, the case is remanded for resentencing.

Remanded for resentencing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

622 P.2d 335, 50 Or. App. 175, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 2270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hernandez-orctapp-1981.