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

State v. Medina

823 P.2d 453, 111 Or. App. 108, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 228
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedJanuary 22, 1992
DocketC90-05-32645; CA A67219
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 823 P.2d 453 (State v. Medina) 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. Medina, 823 P.2d 453, 111 Or. App. 108, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 228 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his convictions by a jury for delivery of a controlled substance and possession of a controlled substance as part of a scheme or network. ORS 475.992; OAR 253-04-002(3), App 4. He did not demur to the indictment but, before sentencing, challenged the constitutionality of the scheme or network language. He has preserved his challenge to the sentence imposed. The state concedes that the sentence is improper. State v. Moeller, 105 Or App 434, 806 P2d 130, rev dismissed 312 Or 76, 815 P2d 701 (1991). We accept that concession.

Because we remand for resentencing on that ground, we need not address defendant’s other assignment of error.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

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

Related

State v. Fraze
838 P.2d 81 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)
State v. Hall
823 P.2d 1042 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)
State v. Medina
823 P.2d 453 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
823 P.2d 453, 111 Or. App. 108, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-medina-orctapp-1992.