State v. Sparks
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partArmstrong, J.
I agree with the majority’s conclusion that the trial court erred in entering convictions on all six burglary counts against defendant. I disagree, however, with its conclusion that the offenses for which defendant was convicted were not part of a single criminal episode.
The majority relies upon State v. Fitzgerald, 267 Or 266, 516 P2d 1280 (1973), for its reasoning and concludes *298that because “a complete account of any one of the unlawful entries could be proven without reference to the others,” the burglaries must have been three separate transactions. I believe that the majority’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. BoydOregon Supreme Court · 1975
- State v. FitzgeraldOregon Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. HathawayCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1986
- State v. CrumalCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
- State v. CliftonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1983
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.