Legal Opinion

State v. Hayes

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 21, 1997No. 95-06-1387M; CA A92680; 93-12-2334; CA A92699; 94-01-0137; CA A92700; 95-03-0649; CA A92737PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtWarren, P. J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction on five offenses, assigning error to the court’s treatment of four1 of the offenses as misdemeanors rather than violations. We reverse and remand.

Defendant asserts, and the state concedes, that the trial court erred by entering misdemeanor convictions and sentencing her as a misdemeanant on four counts, on the ground that the underlying charges were for violations, as a matter of law, because the district attorney failed to satisfy the requirements of ORS 161.565(2).2 State v. Bonnin, 144 Or App 263, 926 P2d 830 (1996).

Although defendant did not…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. BonninCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  2. State v. FranksCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API