Legal Opinion

State v. Hoffmeister

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 24, 1999No. 96-10-37558; CA A99437PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDe Muniz, P. J.

Defendant appeals his 21-month prison sentence for burglary in the first degree. ORS 164.225. That term was imposed as a sanction following the revocation of defendant’s probation. At issue is whether we may review the revocation sentence and, if so, whether the trial court erred in imposing a probation revocation sanction authorized under a guidelines gridblock other than the one used to sentence defendant initially. We hold that the sentence is reviewable and that the trial court erred. Accordingly, we reverse.

Defendant was indicted on two counts each of burglary in the first degree, ORS…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. DeCampCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  2. State v. GuytonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
  3. State v. QuackenbushCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  4. State v. PuckettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. State v. NewellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  2. State v. BranamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  3. State v. BurnsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  4. State v. BolfCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2008
  5. State v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011

11 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