Legal Opinion

State v. Lavitsky

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 20, 2000No. C9601-30470; CA A101772PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*508LINDER, J.

The state appeals from an amended judgment of conviction and sentence for first-degree manslaughter, arguing that the sentencing court lacked authority to modify the sentence. Alternatively, the state asserts that, even if the court had that authority, the particular modification it made — i.e., entering the amended judgment nunc pro tunc “as, of, and for June 7,1994,” which effectively gave defendant 25 months of credit on his 65-month sentence — was beyond the court’s authority. We conclude that the sentencing court had authority to enter an amended judgment because the original…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Huddleston v. SawyerOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  2. State v. DeCampCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  3. Matter of Marriage of MullinaxOregon Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Caveny v. ASHEIMOregon Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Gillespie v. KononenOregon Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. StubbsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  2. State v. ArnoldCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  3. State v. RileyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2004
  4. Evans v. BrentmarCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  5. State v. HardingCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API