Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Warren

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 31, 2000No. 960735047; CA A97879Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBrewer, J.

The majority holds that the trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences on defendant’s convictions, following a jury trial for attempted murder with a firearm, ORS 163.115(1), and assault in the first degree, ORS 163.185. Because the trial court was authorized to impose consecutive sentences under ORS 137.123(5)(a), I dissent from that portion of its disposition.

On May 23,1996, the victim encountered defendant and two friends at a Portland nightclub. Defendant and his friends were leaving the club when the victim entered. The victim exchanged words with the three men. Defendant took…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. RacicotCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  2. State v. Rojas-MontalvoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  3. State v. PetrieCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API