Home/Court of Appeals of Oregon/State v. McCullough

State v. McCullough

37 P.3d 186, 178 Or. App. 411, 2001 Ore. App. LEXIS 1876
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedDecember 19, 2001
Docket960836084; A110263
StatusPublished

This text of 37 P.3d 186 (State v. McCullough) 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. McCullough, 37 P.3d 186, 178 Or. App. 411, 2001 Ore. App. LEXIS 1876 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from a judgment finding him in violation of and revoking his probation for manufacturing a controlled substance. ORS 475.992(l)(a). Defendant argues, inter alia, that the trial court erred in failing to advise him adequately of the risks and consequences of proceeding pro se at the probation violation hearing. The state confesses error in that regard, and we determine that that concession is well-founded. See State v. Meyrick, 313 Or 125, 133, 831 P2d 666 (1992); State v. Quintero, 162 Or App 674, 675, 986 P2d 665 (1999).

Reversed and remanded.

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

Related

State v. Quintero
986 P.2d 665 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1999)
State v. Meyrick
831 P.2d 666 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
37 P.3d 186, 178 Or. App. 411, 2001 Ore. App. LEXIS 1876, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mccullough-orctapp-2001.