State v. Racicot

*559DE MUNIZ, J.

Defendant appeals from consecutive sentences total-ling 60 years imposed after his convictions on seven counts. He argues that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences, because it failed to make findings justifying the sentences as required by ORS 137.123(4). We vacate the consecutive sentences and remand for resentencing.

Before the passage of Ballot Measure 10 in 1986, ORS 137.1221 governed the imposition of consecutive sentences. ORS 137.122(4) provided that the court had discretion to impose consecutive sentences “only if the court finds” the conditions stated in…