Legal Opinion

State v. West-Howell

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 23, 2016No. 11C47990; A157181PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGarrett, J.

Defendant appeals a judgment convicting him of, among other offenses, two counts of first-degree sodomy, ORS 163.4051 (Counts 2 and 5). He assigns error to the trial court’s failure to merge the guilty verdicts on those two counts into a single conviction under ORS 161.0672 (the antimerger statute), arguing that the record lacks evidence of a sufficient pause between the two violations. Defendant also raises an unpreserved challenge to the trial court’s imposition of court-appointed attorney fees. For the reasons explained below, we reverse the portion of the judgment that requires defendant…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. CoverstoneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  2. State v. WhiteOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State v. PendergraphtCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  4. State v. HuffmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  5. State v. BarnumOregon Supreme Court · 2002

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. NelsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  2. State v. BartonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  3. State v. DuganCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  4. State v. LasheskiCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  5. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2022

9 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