Legal Opinion

State v. Orozoco-Navarro

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 23, 2018No. A162286PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

*32Defendant appeals his judgment of conviction for several sex offenses, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress statements he made to the police after invoking his Miranda rights, and the trial court's imposition of court-appointed attorney fees in the amount of $1,144. We reject without written discussion defendant's assignment or error that the court erred by not suppressing his post-invocation statements and write only to address the imposition of court-appointed attorney fees.

Defendant asserts that the court plainly erred by imposing attorney fees because *168the record…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. CoverstoneCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  2. State v. Ramirez-HernandezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
  3. State v. BelenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2016
  4. State v. Mejia-EspinozaCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API