Legal Opinion

State v. Pulcipher

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 1, 2009No. C020754CR, C020987CR, C013620CR A118944 (Control), A120457, A120070PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrewer, C. J.

This case is before us on remand from the Supreme Court, which vacated our prior decision, State v. Pulcipher, 201 Or App 214, 116 P3d 951 (2005) (Pulcipher I), in light of State v. Ramirez, 343 Or 505, 173 P3d 817 (2007), adh’d, to as modified on recons, 344 Or 195, 179 P3d 673 (2008), and State v. Fults, 343 Or 515, 173 P3d 822 (2007). State v. Pulcipher, 345 Or 316, 195 P3d 63 (2008). In Pulcipher I, we vacated defendant’s sentences and remanded for resentencing because the trial court had imposed departure sentences based on judicial findings. That factfinding constituted plain error, and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1991
  2. State v. FultsOregon Supreme Court · 2007
  3. State v. RamirezOregon Supreme Court · 2007
  4. State v. PulcipherCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. PulcipherCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
  2. State v. PULCIPHERCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009

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

Powered by the Exa API