State v. Truong
This text of 267 P.3d 121 (State v. Truong) 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.
Opinion
The state and defendant petition for reconsideration of our decision in State v. Truong, 265 Or App 730, 337 P3d 845 (2014), contending that our disposition was erroneous. We grant reconsideration, and, for the reasons stated below, withdraw our former disposition and substitute a new one.
The judgment that defendant appealed reflected (1) convictions on Counts 2, 6, 7, and 8; (2) the merger of the guilty verdict on Count 3 with Count 2, and (3) defendant’s acquittal on Counts 1, 4, and 5. On appeal, we concluded that the court committed an evidentiary error that was not harmless. Our disposition stated, “Reversed and remanded on Counts 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.”
On reconsideration, both parties contend that our disposition was erroneous because, having reversed and remanded on the five identified counts, there was no reason “to conduct a new sentencing hearing unless defendant is found guilty following a new trial.” We agree. Accordingly, the parties are correct that we should not have remanded the case for resentencing.
Reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn; reversed and remanded on Counts 2, 3, 6, 7, and 8; otherwise affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
267 P.3d 121, 267 Or. App. 121, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-truong-orctapp-2014.