Legal Opinion

State v. McCollister

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 20, 2006No. CR040366; A127279PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrewer, C. J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment in which the sentencing court imposed a cluster of special conditions of probation commonly referred to as a “sex offender package.” Defendant contends that, in imposing those special conditions, the court erred in making a factual determination that had to be submitted to a jury under Blakely v. Washington, 542 US 296, 124 S Ct 2531, 157 L Ed 2d 309 (2004), and Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 US 466, 120 S Ct 2348, 147 L Ed 2d 435 (2000). We affirm.

Defendant was charged with two counts of sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.427, and one count of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. State v. DiltsOregon Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. MartinOregon Supreme Court · 1978
  5. State v. FlickerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. BordersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
  2. State v. GalloCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  3. Sewell v. Xpress LubeUtah Supreme Court · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API