State v. Sims

457 P.3d 1118, 302 Or. App. 367
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedFebruary 20, 2020
DocketA169162
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 457 P.3d 1118 (State v. Sims) 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. Sims, 457 P.3d 1118, 302 Or. App. 367 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).

Opinion

Submitted January 27; portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay $255 DUII conviction fee and $100 bench probation fee reversed, otherwise affirmed February 20, 2020

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ALFRED LYNN SIMS, aka Alfred L. Sims, Defendant-Appellant. Multnomah County Circuit Court 18CR26758; A169162 457 P3d 1118

Leslie M. Roberts, Judge. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Stacy M. Du Clos, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Colm Moore, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and James, Judge. PER CURIAM Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay $255 DUII conviction fee and $100 bench probation fee reversed; otherwise affirmed. 368 State v. Sims

PER CURIAM Defendant was convicted of reckless driving, ORS 811.140, and sentenced to probation. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in imposing a $255 driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) conviction fee and a $100 bench probation fee. He also argues that the trial court erred in imposing $1,181.44 in restitution for 32 hours of the victim’s lost wages. We reject without discussion defendant’s challenge to the imposition of restitution. The state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing the DUII conviction fee and bench probation fee. As the parties acknowledge, the DUII conviction fee was erroneously imposed because defen- dant was not convicted of DUII. On review of the record, we conclude that it is clear that the trial court intended to waive the bench probation fee. See generally State v. Sankey, 289 Or App 846, 409 P3d 73 (2018) (reversing $255 DUII conviction fee and $100 bench probation fee where record was clear that the court intended to waive them). Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay $255 DUII conviction fee and $100 bench probation fee reversed; otherwise affirmed.

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

Related

State v. Garibay-Romero
457 P.3d 1118 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2020)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
457 P.3d 1118, 302 Or. App. 367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-sims-orctapp-2020.