Legal Opinion

State v. Swartz

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided August 30, 2017No. 13CR1606; A156697PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

In this criminal case, defendant appeals the trial court’s judgment convicting her of one count of resisting arrest, ORS 162.315. On appeal, defendant assigns error to the trial court’s imposition of $400 in court-appointed attorney fees.1 Defendant argues, and the state concedes, that the trial court plainly erred by imposing the fees because the record contains no information regarding whether defendant “is or may be able to pay” the fees. See ORS 151.505(3) (providing that a court may not order a person to pay attorney fees unless the person “is or may be able to pay” them); ORS 161.665(4)…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. VanornumOregon Supreme Court · 2013
  2. State v. CoverstoneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  3. State v. OliphantOregon Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Tenbusch v. Linn CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  5. State v. HousegoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. MeyerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021
  2. State v. FlackCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API