Legal Opinion

State v. Merrick

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 10, 2008No. 05FE0285; A136411PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant was convicted after a bench trial on three counts of first-degree possession of a forged instrument, ORS 165.022, and one count of first-degree forgery, ORS 165.013. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in failing to merge his three convictions for first-degree possession of a forged instrument. The state notes that, although the error is arguably unpreserved, the error is apparent on the face of the record and defendant is entitled to reversal and remand for merger of his convictions. As explained below, we agree and accept the state’s concession.

A complete discussion of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. WhiteOregon Supreme Court · 2006
  2. State v. GlaspeyOregon Supreme Court · 2004

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. HuffmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  2. State v. G. L. D.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2012
  3. State v. MasonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  4. Burcham v. FrankeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  5. State v. SalvadorCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010

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