State v. Sanchez

824 P.2d 1191, 111 Or. App. 116, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 235
Court of Appeals of Oregon·Decided January 22, 1992·No. 90-04-33301; CA A66117·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was charged with unlawful delivery of a controlled substance as part of a scheme or network. There is no record that he filed a demurrer. He pled guilty as part of an agreement in which the prosecutor agreed to stipulate that defendant would be sentenced under gridblock 8G and agreed not to prosecute defendant on a second felony drug offense. Defendant’s assignment of error is that the court erred in sentencing him to 22 months imprisonment, which is within the presumptive range for gridblock 8G. He contends that, because after he was sentenced we held that the “scheme or network” language violated the Oregon constitution, his sentence must be vacated. See State v. Moeller, 105 Or App 434, 806 P2d 130, rev dismissed 312 Or 76, 815 P2d 201 (1991).

There is no authority for us to review the sentence here. ORS 138.222(2)(d); State v. Rathbone I, 110 Or App 414, 823 P2d 430 (1991).

Affirmed.

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

State v. Sanchez, 824 P.2d 1191, 111 Or. App. 116, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 235 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

824 P.2d 1191 (State v. Sanchez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. RATHBONE III
823 P.2d 430 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1991)
State v. Moeller
806 P.2d 130 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1991)
Gabler v. Embassy Suites Hotel
1991 OK CIV APP 26 (Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, 1991)
State v. Moeller
815 P.2d 701 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1991)