Legal Opinion

State v. Chase

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 19, 1993No. 10-86-03551B, 10-86-03551X, 10-86-03551 CA A66149 (Control), CA A66233, CA A66370PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

In CA A66149 and CA A66233, defendant appeals from an order that revoked his probation and executed a previously suspended sentence. ORS 138.040; ORS 138.053 (l)(f), (3). He argues that his probation was void and that the trial court erred in revoking it. He also argues that the court failed to advise him of his right to counsel in the probation revocation proceeding. The state asks us to dismiss the appeal as moot, because defendant has served the executed sentence and was discharged from parole. State v. Neidenbach, 300 Or 176, 178, 708 P2d 355 (1985). Defendant does not oppose the state’s…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. NeidenbachOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  2. State v. LincolnCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1971

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. DickCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  2. Thompson v. PrinslowCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  3. Thompson v. PrinslowCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1995
  4. Jones v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998
  5. Jones v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API