Legal Opinion

State v. Brand

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 24, 2013No. 09P3143; A148891PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDuncan, J.

Defendant appeals the trial court’s judgment revoking the terms of his probationary supervision and imposing consecutive incarceration sanctions. He argues that, because he committed a single probation violation, the court was required, by OAR 213-012-0040(2), to impose concurrent sanctions. We agree and, therefore, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

The relevant facts are procedural. On September 24, 2009, pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant pleaded guilty to Counts 1 and 2, unlawful delivery of a controlled substance to a minor, ORS 465.906, and Count 4 of the indictment,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Beall Transport Equipment Co. v. Southern Pacific TransportationCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  2. Beall Transport Equipment Co. v. Southern Pacific TransportationCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  3. State v. NewellCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  4. State v. StokesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  5. State v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Young v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013
  2. Plotkin v. State Accident Insurance FundCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  3. Handy v. Lane CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015
  4. Botts Marsh LLC v. City of WheelerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023
  5. Botts Marsh LLC v. City of WheelerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2023

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

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

Powered by the Exa API