State v. Morgan

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Morgan

653 P.2d 1318, 60 Or. App. 491, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 4290

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedDecember 1, 1982

DocketNo. 45586 and 45615, CA A24297 and A24298

StatusPublished

This text of 653 P.2d 1318 (State v. Morgan) 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. Morgan, 653 P.2d 1318, 60 Or. App. 491, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 4290 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was charged and convicted of the theft of crab pots belonging to two other persons. In imposing sentence, the trial court required restitution, inter alia, for six crab pots whose loss is not shown on this record to be connected with defendant’s criminal activity. The state concedes that the restitution ordered in favor of each of the two parties should be reduced by $300. Exercising our authority under Or Const, Art VII (Amended), § 3, we amend the judgment accordingly.

Judgment of conviction amended to require, as a condition of probation, that defendant make restitution to Henry Knutson in the sum of $124 and to Robert Pacheco in the sum of $472. Affirmed as modified.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant was charged and convicted of the theft of crab pots belonging to two other persons. In imposing sentence, the trial court required restitution, inter alia, for six crab pots whose loss is not shown on this record to be connected with defendant’s criminal activity. The state concedes that the restitution ordered in favor of each of the two parties should be reduced by $300. Exercising our authority under Or Const, Art VII (Amended), § 3, we amend the judgment accordingly.

Judgment of conviction amended to require, as a condition of probation, that defendant make restitution to Henry Knutson in the sum of $124 and to Robert Pacheco in the sum of $472. Affirmed as modified.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

653 P.2d 1318, 60 Or. App. 491, 1982 Ore. App. LEXIS 4290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-morgan-orctapp-1982.