Legal Opinion

State v. Thomas

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided October 19, 2016No. 13FE0896; A156261PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDevore, J.

In this criminal appeal, defendant challenges the imposition of restitution, because his plea agreement had not included it. Defendant argues that, by requesting restitution, the state breached the plea agreement, the trial court should have specifically enforced the agreement, and the trial court erred by imposing restitution of $6,460. We agree that the state breached the plea agreement and that the court erred by proceeding to sentence defendant without regard to the breach. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings under a correct understanding of the law, as explained…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Yogman v. ParrottOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Anchorage Roofing Co., Inc. v. GonzalesAlaska Supreme Court · 1973
  4. State v. HeisserOregon Supreme Court · 2011
  5. State v. McDonnellOregon Supreme Court · 1990

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. LynchCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  2. State v. KendrickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  3. State v. CliftonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  4. State v. MarlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2026
  5. State v. MarlerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2026

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

Powered by the Exa API