State v. Zolotoff

Marion County Circuit Court, Oregon

State v. Zolotoff

379 P.3d 878, 279 Or. App. 605, 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 911

CourtMarion County Circuit Court, Oregon

DecidedJuly 20, 2016

Docket09C42126; A158024

StatusPublished

This text of 379 P.3d 878 (State v. Zolotoff) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Marion County Circuit Court, Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Zolotoff, 379 P.3d 878, 279 Or. App. 605, 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 911 (Or. Super. Ct. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of possession of a weapon by an inmate and was sentenced to 36 months of incarceration and 24 months of post-prison supervision. The trial court also imposed a $200 fine and $1,019 in court-appointed attorney fees. On appeal, defendant challenges only the imposition of the attorney fees, arguing that the trial court plainly erred by imposing those fees when the record is silent as to defendant’s ability to pay them. See ORS 151.505(3); ORS 161.665(4). The state concedes that the court plainly erred in that respect. We agree with the state and, for the reasons expressed in State v. Coverstone, 260 Or App 714, 716-17, 320 P3d 670 (2014), exercise our discretion to correct the error.

Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM

Defendant was convicted of possession of a weapon by an inmate and was sentenced to 36 months of incarceration and 24 months of post-prison supervision. The trial court also imposed a $200 fine and $1,019 in court-appointed attorney fees. On appeal, defendant challenges only the imposition of the attorney fees, arguing that the trial court plainly erred by imposing those fees when the record is silent as to defendant’s ability to pay them. See ORS 151.505(3); ORS 161.665(4). The state concedes that the court plainly erred in that respect. We agree with the state and, for the reasons expressed in State v. Coverstone, 260 Or App 714, 716-17, 320 P3d 670 (2014), exercise our discretion to correct the error.

Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

379 P.3d 878, 279 Or. App. 605, 2016 Ore. App. LEXIS 911, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-zolotoff-orccmarion-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack