State v. Reed

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Reed

635 P.2d 679, 54 Or. App. 671, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 3817

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedNovember 9, 1981

Docket78-09-15105, CA 19709

StatusPublished

This text of 635 P.2d 679 (State v. Reed) 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. Reed, 635 P.2d 679, 54 Or. App. 671, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 3817 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the sentencing order entered by the trial court following revocation of her probation, which she was granted after she pled guilty to unlawfully obtaining food stamps assistance. She makes two contentions, one of which was not raised in the trial court and will not be considered here for the first time. State v. Evans, 290 Or 707, 625 P2d 1300 (1981).

Defendant’s other contention is that the trial court lacked authority to impose restitution as a condition of her parole. She is correct, State v. Kipp, 52 Or App 1011, 630 P2d 394 (1981); that condition is to be treated as a recommendation by the court to the Parole Board and, as such, can have no binding effect. State v. O’Keefe, 40 Or App 685, 596 P2d 987, rev den 288 Or 81 (1979).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the sentencing order entered by the trial court following revocation of her probation, which she was granted after she pled guilty to unlawfully obtaining food stamps assistance. She makes two contentions, one of which was not raised in the trial court and will not be considered here for the first time. State v. Evans, 290 Or 707, 625 P2d 1300 (1981).

Defendant’s other contention is that the trial court lacked authority to impose restitution as a condition of her parole. She is correct, State v. Kipp, 52 Or App 1011, 630 P2d 394 (1981); that condition is to be treated as a recommendation by the court to the Parole Board and, as such, can have no binding effect. State v. O’Keefe, 40 Or App 685, 596 P2d 987, rev den 288 Or 81 (1979).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

635 P.2d 679, 54 Or. App. 671, 1981 Ore. App. LEXIS 3817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-reed-orctapp-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack