State v. Manrique

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Manrique

545 P.2d 603, 24 Or. App. 309, 1976 Ore. App. LEXIS 2282

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedFebruary 3, 1976

DocketNo. C73-07-2205 Cr, CA 4973

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 545 P.2d 603 (State v. Manrique) 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. Manrique, 545 P.2d 603, 24 Or. App. 309, 1976 Ore. App. LEXIS 2282 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant, upon retrial, State v. Manrique, 270 Or 201, 531 P2d 239 (1975), was convicted of criminal activity in drugs, ORS 167.207, and sentenced to five years in the penitentiary. On appeal he makes two assignments of error.

The first assignment does not warrant discussion. The second concerns the failure of the judgment order to recite that defendant was to receive credit for time served pursuant to his initial conviction. The state concedes that defendant is correct and, in fact, has already caused his records to be corrected accordingly. We think it desirable, however, that the judgment order itself recite defendant’s entitlement.

Remanded for entry of an appropriate order.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant, upon retrial, State v. Manrique, 270 Or 201, 531 P2d 239 (1975), was convicted of criminal activity in drugs, ORS 167.207, and sentenced to five years in the penitentiary. On appeal he makes two assignments of error.

The first assignment does not warrant discussion. The second concerns the failure of the judgment order to recite that defendant was to receive credit for time served pursuant to his initial conviction. The state concedes that defendant is correct and, in fact, has already caused his records to be corrected accordingly. We think it desirable, however, that the judgment order itself recite defendant’s entitlement.

Remanded for entry of an appropriate order.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

545 P.2d 603, 24 Or. App. 309, 1976 Ore. App. LEXIS 2282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-manrique-orctapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack