State v. McCollister
Court of Appeals of Oregon
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
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- State v. DiltsOregon Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. MartinOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- State v. FlickerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. BordersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018
- State v. GalloCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
- Sewell v. Xpress LubeUtah Supreme Court · 2013