Legal Opinion

State v. Stone

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 31, 1993No. C91-12-36516; CA A74222Published

1Per curiam

Defendant pled guilty to unauthorized use of a vehicle. ORS 164.135. As part of the sentence, the court required him to pay restitution to the victim for property that was in the vehicle. Defendant argues, and the state concedes, that defendant only admitted to unauthorized use of the vehicle, and not to theft of the property in it. He was in possession of the car about three weeks after it was reported stolen. The property was not in the vehicle at that time. We accept the state’s concession. The court did not have authority to order restitution for the property. ORS 137.106(1); State v.…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. PotterCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API