Legal Opinion

State v. Melillo

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 12, 1999No. 960625BC2; CA A93228PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, P. J.

The state appeals from a judgment imposing a 38-month prison sentence for first-degree robbery. ORS 164.415(1). Despite the state’s request, the trial court refused to impose the 90-month sentence mandated by Ballot Measure 11 as codified in ORS 137.700(2)(q) (1995). We reverse and remand.

The state first argues that the trial court lacked authority to impose the 38-month sentence because it had been required previously by the Supreme Court to impose the 90-month sentence. The state’s argument is based on the following facts. Defendant was convicted of first-degree robbery for a crime that he…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Weems v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  3. State Ex Rel. Huddleston v. SawyerOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Cannon v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1955
  5. State v. IsomOregon Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. BuckCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2007
  2. InfoArmor Incorporated v. BallardDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API