State v. Waldron

• Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
• Decided: May 20, 2026
• Docket: A182955
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

814 May 20, 2026 No. 453

This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. KEVIN JAMES WALDRON, Defendant-Appellant. Coos County Circuit Court 23CR18872; A182955

Martin E. Stone, Judge. Submitted April 23, 2025. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Nora Coon, Deputy Public Defender, Oregon Public Defense Commission, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and E. Nani Apo, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Shorr, Presiding Judge, Powers, Judge, and Pagán, Judge. PER CURIAM Affirmed. Nonprecedential Memo Op: 349 Or App 814 (2026) 815

PER CURIAM In this criminal case, defendant pleaded guilty to unlawful use of a weapon and second-degree criminal mis- chief, and the trial court imposed restitution, among other terms of his sentence, after a contested hearing. On appeal, defendant raises a single assignment of error, contending that the trial court plainly erred when it imposed restitu- tion because he was entitled under both the state and fed- eral constitutions to have a jury determine the amount of restitution. See State v. Vanornum, 354 Or 614, 629, 317 P3d 889 (2013) (outlining the requirements for plain-error review). Here, because the legal point is not obvious, we readily reject defendant’s sole argument on appeal. Indeed, we recently rejected similar arguments in State v. Myers, 349 Or App 80, ___ P3d ___ (2026), and State v. Rich, 349 Or App 48, ___ P3d ___ (2026). Affirmed.