State v. Manuel
This text of 736 P.2d 627 (State v. Manuel) 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.
Opinion
Defendant was convicted of two Class A misdemeanors committed on August 26,1984, and another Class A misdemeanor committed on April 18,1986, and was placed on probation for all three offenses. The trial court later revoked probation and imposed one year sentences on each charge, ordering that the sentence for the April 18 charge be served consecutively to the concurrent sentences imposed on the first two offenses. Defendant argues that the trial court did not comply with ORS 137.122(6), which requires the court to “state its reasons for [imposing consecutive sentences] * * * on the record,” and that, therefore, imposition of the consecutive sentence was error. The state concedes that the trial court did not comply with the statute. We therefore vacate the sentences imposed for the three offenses and remand for resentencing.
Sentences vacated; remanded for resentencing.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
736 P.2d 627, 85 Or. App. 423, 1987 Ore. App. LEXIS 3709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-manuel-orctapp-1987.