State v. Haywood

In these consolidated criminal appeals, defendant asserts that his various sentences on charges of robbery, rape and kidnapping were excessive, cruel and unusual or that, in the alternative, the trial court lacked the authority to direct that certain of the sentences be served consecutively. As to the former claim, we find no error. State v. Dinkel, 34 Or App 375, 579 P2d 245 (1978). As to the specific question of authority to impose consecutive sentences, we adhere to the often-stated view that circuit courts have such authority. See State v. Jones, 250 Or 59, 440 P2d 374 (1968).

One final…