State v. Rose

Defendant appeals from his convictions for unauthorized use of and the theft of a motor vehicle, ORS 164.135, ORS 164.055, and from the trial court’s imposition of restitution as a condition of probation.

The state concedes that defendant’s sentencing order should be amended to delete the conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle because this charge was dismissed by the trial court at defendant’s request and with the state’s concurrence. The sentencing order indicates that defendant was convicted of both charges, but imposes sentence for only the theft charge. It is clear from the…