Home/Court of Appeals of Oregon/State v. Waldrip

State v. Waldrip

842 P.2d 467, 117 Or. App. 249, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 2411
CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon
DecidedDecember 16, 1992
Docket91NB-1519, 91NB-1696, 91CR-2515; CA A73229, A73230, A73231
StatusPublished

This text of 842 P.2d 467 (State v. Waldrip) 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. Waldrip, 842 P.2d 467, 117 Or. App. 249, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 2411 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of driving under the influence of intoxicants in 3 separate cases. In each, the court imposed a jail term, suspended execution of a portion of that sentence and placed defendant on probation. The state concedes that the court did not have the authority at the same time to impose and order executed a sentence of incarceration and to place defendant on probation. State v. McMellon, 110 Or App 441, 823 P2d 996 (1992); State v. Vasby, 101 Or App 1, 788 P2d 1024 (1990). We accept the concession.

Defendant’s other assignments of error are moot.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

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

Related

State v. McMellon
823 P.2d 996 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1992)
State v. Vasby
788 P.2d 1024 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
842 P.2d 467, 117 Or. App. 249, 1992 Ore. App. LEXIS 2411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-waldrip-orctapp-1992.