Legal Opinion

State v. O'QUINN

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 5, 1997No. F95-111138C and F95-121325C CA A92023 (Control) and CA A92024PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEdmonds, J.

After a trial to the court, defendant was found guilty of two counts of burglary in the first degree. ORS 164.225. 1 At sentencing, the court enhanced the sentences on the convictions from crime category 7 to category 9 on the ground that the state alleged and proved that defendant was armed with a deadly weapon in the commission of the offenses. OAR 253-04-002(2), App 3. Defendant appeals and assigns error to the sentencing classifications, arguing that the state failed to prove that he was armed with a deadly weapon and that, therefore, the court was required to rank the offenses in crime…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. MustainCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
  2. State v. LarkOregon Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. MinterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Norwood v. PremoCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2017
  2. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
  3. State v. HurstCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API