Legal Opinion

State v. Foos

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 28, 2018No. A164529PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.

*117In this criminal appeal, defendant challenges a term in a judgment stating that "[p]ayment of the fines, fees, assessments, and/or attorney's fees noted in this and any subsequent Money Award shall be scheduled by the clerk of the court pursuant to ORS 161.675." According to defendant, because she was sentenced to a term of incarceration, that term in the judgment is unlawful. We do not read the judgment as imposing an unlawful monetary obligation while defendant is incarcerated, nor authorizing the imposition of a payment schedule upon her release and accordingly affirm.

The facts underlying…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1998
  2. McCarthy v. Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State v. DeCampCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
  4. State v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
  5. State ex rel. Tolls v. TollsOregon Supreme Court · 1938

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. LobueCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  2. State v. SaundersCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  3. State v. LordCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2020
  4. State v. WaldronCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2019
  5. State v. HackettCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021

2 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