State v. Sabet

150 P.3d 5, 210 Or. App. 100, 2006 Ore. App. LEXIS 1957
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedDecember 20, 2006
DocketD040271M; A125991
StatusPublished

This text of 150 P.3d 5 (State v. Sabet) 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. Sabet, 150 P.3d 5, 210 Or. App. 100, 2006 Ore. App. LEXIS 1957 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals her convictions on four counts of telephonic harassment, ORS 166.090, arguing that the trial court erred in accepting her waiver of her right to counsel without discerning whether defendant understood the dangers of self-representation. The state concedes that the trial court did not engage in a colloquy with defendant to address the risks of self-representation or the benefits of having an attorney. We accept the state’s concession as well founded. See State v. Meyrick, 313 Or 125, 133, 831 P2d 666 (1992) (explaining the need for a trial court to ensure that the defendant “understand[s] the risks of self-representation”).

Reversed and remanded for new trial.

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

Related

State v. Meyrick
831 P.2d 666 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
150 P.3d 5, 210 Or. App. 100, 2006 Ore. App. LEXIS 1957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-sabet-orctapp-2006.