State v. Lane

Oregon’s sentencing guidelines provide that, if a defendant with multiple terms of probation commits a single probation violation, any resulting terms of incarceration must be imposed concurrently, not consecutively. OAR 213-012-0040(2)(a). At issue in this case is whether that guidelines provision runs afoul of Article I, section 44(l)(b), of the Oregon Constitution, adopted by the voters in 1999 upon referral by the legislature. That section provides that “ [n] o law shall limit a court’s authority to sentence a criminal defendant consecutively for crimes against different victims.” Id. The…