Legal Opinion

State v. Carrillo

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 6, 2017No. 201303371; A156954PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DUNCAN, J. pro tempore

Defendant appeals the trial court’s judgment convicting and sentencing him for multiple drug offenses. On appeal, defendant asserts that the court committed plain error by imposing consecutive sentences that resulted in a total incarceration term that violated the “200 percent rule,” which limits the total incarceration term for consecutive sentences for crimes arising out of the same criminal episode to 200 percent of the maximum presumptive term for the primary offense, except by departure. OAR 213-012-0020(2)(b); State v. Miller, 317 Or 297, 305, 855 P2d 1093 (1993)…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. MillerOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  2. State v. CuevasOregon Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Orchard v. MillsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2011
  4. State v. LundstedtCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  5. State v. HIEU DOAN TRUONGCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. DecleveCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  2. State v. RedmondCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API