Legal Opinion

State v. Hill

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 25, 1992No. C90-07-34013; CA A67950PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Per curiam

Defendant was sentenced on her conviction for theft in the first degree, ORS 164.055, to six months in jail and was required to complete a mandatory drug program. That is a dispositional departure from the presumptive sentence under the sentencing guidelines. OAR 253-04-001. She argues that there are not substantial and compelling reasons for the departure.

Defendant’s specific argument is that the court used her previous convictions to justify the departure and that those convictions were already accounted for in her criminal history score. She is wrong. The court’s findings were that…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
  2. State v. SpeedisOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  3. State v. Zavala-RamosCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  4. State v. HillCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  5. State v. NelsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993

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

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

Powered by the Exa API