State v. Slagle

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Slagle

667 P.2d 1, 64 Or. App. 1, 1983 Ore. App. LEXIS 3431

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedJuly 20, 1983

Docket81-2438; CA A24052

StatusPublished

This text of 667 P.2d 1 (State v. Slagle) 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. Slagle, 667 P.2d 1, 64 Or. App. 1, 1983 Ore. App. LEXIS 3431 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant pled guilty to custodial interference in the second degree and, on December 8,1981, she was sentenced to six months in jail. Execution of the sentence was suspended, and she was placed on probation for 30 months. No appeal was taken from that order. Following a hearing on February 26, 1982, defendant’s probation was revoked, and by order dated March 11,1982, execution of the sentence previously imposed was ordered.

Defendant appeals from a purported order of February 26, 1982, the sole assignment of error being that the sentence imposed was excessive, cruel and unusual. The only order that was entered, which is the one that is attached to the notice of appeal, is the March 11, 1982, order executing the sentence previously imposed. Defendant’s right to challenge the sentence imposed as excessive expired 30 days after the December, 1981, sentencing order was entered, and this court has no authority to consider that question, even though the notice of appeal designates a later order executing that sentence. State v. Martinez, 35 Or App 381, 581 P2d 955, rev den 285 Or 73 (1979).

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant pled guilty to custodial interference in the second degree and, on December 8,1981, she was sentenced to six months in jail. Execution of the sentence was suspended, and she was placed on probation for 30 months. No appeal was taken from that order. Following a hearing on February 26, 1982, defendant’s probation was revoked, and by order dated March 11,1982, execution of the sentence previously imposed was ordered.

Defendant appeals from a purported order of February 26, 1982, the sole assignment of error being that the sentence imposed was excessive, cruel and unusual. The only order that was entered, which is the one that is attached to the notice of appeal, is the March 11, 1982, order executing the sentence previously imposed. Defendant’s right to challenge the sentence imposed as excessive expired 30 days after the December, 1981, sentencing order was entered, and this court has no authority to consider that question, even though the notice of appeal designates a later order executing that sentence. State v. Martinez, 35 Or App 381, 581 P2d 955, rev den 285 Or 73 (1979).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

667 P.2d 1, 64 Or. App. 1, 1983 Ore. App. LEXIS 3431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-slagle-orctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack