State v. Leader

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Leader

416 P.3d 333, 291 Or. App. 594

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedMay 2, 2018

DocketA163826

StatusPublished

This text of 416 P.3d 333 (State v. Leader) 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. Leader, 416 P.3d 333, 291 Or. App. 594 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

*595Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for second-degree robbery. We write to address only defendant's assignment of error regarding the imposition of $1,600 in court-appointed attorney fees. We reject defendant's remaining assignments of error without written discussion.

As to the attorney fees, defendant argues that the trial court committed plain error when it ordered him to pay those fees because the record contains no evidence of defendant's ability to pay them. The state concedes that the trial court's imposition of attorney fees constitutes plain error. We accept the state's concession and conclude that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the plain error in this case for the reasons stated in State v. Coverstone , 260 Or.App. 714, 716-17, 320 P.3d 670 (2014) -viz. , the gravity of the error, the length of defendant's prison term, and the lack of any evidence of financial resources.

Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay court-appointed attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

*595Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for second-degree robbery. We write to address only defendant's assignment of error regarding the imposition of $1,600 in court-appointed attorney fees. We reject defendant's remaining assignments of error without written discussion.

As to the attorney fees, defendant argues that the trial court committed plain error when it ordered him to pay those fees because the record contains no evidence of defendant's ability to pay them. The state concedes that the trial court's imposition of attorney fees constitutes plain error. We accept the state's concession and conclude that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the plain error in this case for the reasons stated in State v. Coverstone , 260 Or.App. 714, 716-17, 320 P.3d 670 (2014) -viz. , the gravity of the error, the length of defendant's prison term, and the lack of any evidence of financial resources.

Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay court-appointed attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

416 P.3d 333, 291 Or. App. 594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-leader-orctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack