Legal Opinion

State v. Surratt

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 4, 1994No. C91-1921CR; CA A76258Published

1Per curiam

Defendant appeals from a judgment requiring him to reimburse the state for court-appointed attorney fees. ORS 161.665(1). He assigns as error the fact that the amount of fees was determined outside his presence after the sentencing hearing was over. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court said that it was adopting the presentence report’s recommendation that defendant pay the fees as a condition of post-prison supervision. The state concedes that the trial court erred when it set the amount of attorney fees outside defendant’s presence. See ORS 137.030; see also State v. Stock, 56 Or App…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1991
  2. State v. FarmerOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. DanielCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  4. State v. StockCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1982
  5. State v. LillieCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API