State v. Jude Somerset Hardesty

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Jude Somerset Hardesty

720 P.2d 1335, 80 Or. App. 144

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJune 18, 1986

DocketC83-01-30043; CA A36551

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 720 P.2d 1335 (State v. Jude Somerset Hardesty) 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. Jude Somerset Hardesty, 720 P.2d 1335, 80 Or. App. 144 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of two counts of robbery in the first degree and one count of rape in the first degree. ORS 163.375; ORS 164.415. He was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment, with a five-year mandatory minimum under ORS 161.610 for use of a firearm, on each charge. The robbery sentences were concurrent, and the rape sentence was consecutive to the robbery sentences. On appeal, we held that defendant could receive only one mandatory minimum sentence under ORS 161.610, and the Supreme Court affirmed. State v. Hardesty, 68 Or App 591, 682 P2d 824, aff’d 298 Or 616, 695 P2d 569 (1985). On resentencing, the trial court again imposed sentences of 20 years imprisonment on each count. It ordered one robbery sentence to be served concurrently with the rape sentence and the other robbery sentence to be served consecutively to those concurrent sentences. On the rape conviction, the court imposed a five-year minimum under ORS 161.610 and a concurrent 10-year minimum under ORS 144.110. Defendant, thus, received a 40-year sentence, with a 10-year minimum, as he had received originally.

Contrary to what defendant argues, the trial court did not impose a harsher sentence but simply and properly fashioned a sentence that accomplished the same result. State v. Haywood, 73 Or App 6, 10, 697 P2d 977 (1985).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of two counts of robbery in the first degree and one count of rape in the first degree. ORS 163.375; ORS 164.415. He was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment, with a five-year mandatory minimum under ORS 161.610 for use of a firearm, on each charge. The robbery sentences were concurrent, and the rape sentence was consecutive to the robbery sentences. On appeal, we held that defendant could receive only one mandatory minimum sentence under ORS 161.610, and the Supreme Court affirmed. State v. Hardesty, 68 Or App 591, 682 P2d 824, aff’d 298 Or 616, 695 P2d 569 (1985). On resentencing, the trial court again imposed sentences of 20 years imprisonment on each count. It ordered one robbery sentence to be served concurrently with the rape sentence and the other robbery sentence to be served consecutively to those concurrent sentences. On the rape conviction, the court imposed a five-year minimum under ORS 161.610 and a concurrent 10-year minimum under ORS 144.110. Defendant, thus, received a 40-year sentence, with a 10-year minimum, as he had received originally.

Contrary to what defendant argues, the trial court did not impose a harsher sentence but simply and properly fashioned a sentence that accomplished the same result. State v. Haywood, 73 Or App 6, 10, 697 P2d 977 (1985).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

720 P.2d 1335, 80 Or. App. 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jude-somerset-hardesty-orctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack