State v. Reed

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Reed

162 P.3d 379, 214 Or. App. 164, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 978

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJuly 11, 2007

DocketF10857; A127684

StatusPublished

This text of 162 P.3d 379 (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, 162 P.3d 379, 214 Or. App. 164, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 978 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his convictions for attempted first-degree rape, ORS 163.375, first-degree sodomy, ORS 163.405, and first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427. On appeal, he raises numerous challenges to his convictions, which we reject without discussion. Defendant further contends that the trial court erred in imposing a compensatory fine of $20,000 to pay for future psychological treatment for the victim. Defendant asserts that no evidence was presented to support such a fine. The state concedes that, under State v. Donahue, 165 Or App 143, 995 P2d 1202 (2000), such fines cannot be imposed in the absence of evidence that the victim has actually suffered a pecuniary loss and that there was no such evidence here. We find the state’s concession to be well founded and, consequently, accept it.

Compensatory fine vacated; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his convictions for attempted first-degree rape, ORS 163.375, first-degree sodomy, ORS 163.405, and first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427. On appeal, he raises numerous challenges to his convictions, which we reject without discussion. Defendant further contends that the trial court erred in imposing a compensatory fine of $20,000 to pay for future psychological treatment for the victim. Defendant asserts that no evidence was presented to support such a fine. The state concedes that, under State v. Donahue, 165 Or App 143, 995 P2d 1202 (2000), such fines cannot be imposed in the absence of evidence that the victim has actually suffered a pecuniary loss and that there was no such evidence here. We find the state’s concession to be well founded and, consequently, accept it.

Compensatory fine vacated; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

162 P.3d 379, 214 Or. App. 164, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 978, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-reed-orctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack