Legal Opinion

State v. Daggett

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided December 7, 2016No. 14032327; A157923Published

1Per curiam

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for two counts of felony violation of a stalking protective order, ORS 163.750(2)(b), raising two assignments of error. We reject his first assignment of error without discussion. In his second assignment of error, he contends that the trial court erred in imposing, in the judgment, a $60 “Mandatory State Amt” on each count. Defendant asserts that the trial court lacked statutory authority to impose those assessments. The state concedes that the trial court lacked authority to impose the $60 assessments and that those portions of the judgment should…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. NuttCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API