State v. Wilcher
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtGraber, P. J.
Defendant was convicted of unauthorized use of a vehicle, ORS 164.135, after a trial to the court on stipulated facts. On appeal, he assigns as error the imposition of restitution as a part of his sentence.
The judgment requires defendant to pay “restitution totalling $1,247.57 — payment schedule to be determined by Parole Board.” He contends, first, that the trial court had no authority to delegate the setting of the payment schedule to the Board of Parole. We agree. ORS 161.675(1) provides, in pertinent part:
“When a defendant, as part of a sentence or as condition of probation or suspension…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. DillonOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. CalderillaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
- State v. HazlittCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
- State v. EwingCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1978
3Cited by5 opinions
- State v. CarpenterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990
- State v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
- Patin v. State Board of ParoleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
- State v. KnuppCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- State v. NagelmakerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992