State v. Wallock/Hara

Defendants appeal their convictions for unlawful racketeering activity, ORS 166.720(3) (ORICO), and two counts of promoting prostitution. ORS 167.012. 1 They argue that the court erred in failing to merge their promoting prostitution and racketeering convictions. We affirm.

Defendants first contend that their convictions for violating ORS 167.012(l)(a) and ORS 167.012(l)(c) should merge. They rely on State v. Williams, 40 Or App 227, 594 P2d 1281 (1979), in which we concluded that a charge of promoting prostitution should merge with two charges of compelling prostitution, because the state had…