State v. Patterson

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Patterson

475 P.2d 91, 3 Or. App. 480, 1970 Ore. App. LEXIS 549

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedOctober 2, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 475 P.2d 91 (State v. Patterson) 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. Patterson, 475 P.2d 91, 3 Or. App. 480, 1970 Ore. App. LEXIS 549 (Or. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

PEE CTJEIAM.

Defendant was convicted of threatening the commission of a felony, OES 161.330, and placed on probation.

Later, after hearing, the probation was revoked. The evidence was that in addition to failing to meet certain conditions of probation, the defendant had committed an assault and battery.

On appeal defendant contends that in the revocation proceeding the trial court should not have received testimony regarding, the alleged assault and battery because he had not yet been tried for that crime. This court held in State v. Spicer, 3 Or App 80, 81, 471 P2d 865 (1970):

“ * * It is not necessary to revocation that the person on probation be convicted of a new crime, but only that the trial judge be satisfied that the purposes of probation are not being served, or that the terms thereof have been violated * * Barker v. Ireland, 238 Or 1, 4, 392 P2d 769 (1964).”

Affirmed.

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