State v. Turner

Court of Appeals of Oregon

State v. Turner

153 P.3d 134, 211 Or. App. 96, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 235

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedFebruary 14, 2007

Docket030432180; A126242

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 153 P.3d 134 (State v. Turner) 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. Turner, 153 P.3d 134, 211 Or. App. 96, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 235 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

*97 PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for two counts of first-degree theft, ORS 164.055, assigning error to the trial court’s failure to merge the two convictions. Defendant was charged in a two-count indictment that alleged, in the first count, that he stole packaged meat from his employer and, in the second count, that he sold that meat to another store. A jury found him guilty of both counts, and the trial court entered a judgment of conviction on both counts. On appeal, defendant argues that under State v. Cox, 336 Or 284, 82 P3d 619 (2003), the court erred in failing to merge the convictions, because the two counts alleged separate aspects of a single offense. The state concedes that, under Cox, the two convictions should merge. We agree and accept the concession. Under State v. White, 202 Or App 1, 13, 121 P3d 3 (2005), aff'd, 341 Or 624, 147 P3d 313 (2006), the proper remedy under the circumstances is to remand the case for entry of a judgment reflecting a single conviction and enumerating the two alternate theories of conviction.

Reversed and remanded with instructions to enter a judgment of conviction for first-degree theft reflecting that defendant was convicted on both theories and for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

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

*97 PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for two counts of first-degree theft, ORS 164.055, assigning error to the trial court’s failure to merge the two convictions. Defendant was charged in a two-count indictment that alleged, in the first count, that he stole packaged meat from his employer and, in the second count, that he sold that meat to another store. A jury found him guilty of both counts, and the trial court entered a judgment of conviction on both counts. On appeal, defendant argues that under State v. Cox, 336 Or 284, 82 P3d 619 (2003), the court erred in failing to merge the convictions, because the two counts alleged separate aspects of a single offense. The state concedes that, under Cox, the two convictions should merge. We agree and accept the concession. Under State v. White, 202 Or App 1, 13, 121 P3d 3 (2005), aff'd, 341 Or 624, 147 P3d 313 (2006), the proper remedy under the circumstances is to remand the case for entry of a judgment reflecting a single conviction and enumerating the two alternate theories of conviction.

Reversed and remanded with instructions to enter a judgment of conviction for first-degree theft reflecting that defendant was convicted on both theories and for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 P.3d 134, 211 Or. App. 96, 2007 Ore. App. LEXIS 235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-turner-orctapp-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack