Legal Opinion

Chriswisser v. Pitts

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 25, 2013No. C111200RO; A149549PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Defendant was found in contempt of court for willfully violating a Family Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) restraining order on two occasions. The court sentenced defendant to probation and ordered defendant to pay attorney fees, a unitary assessment, and an offense surcharge. On appeal from the contempt judgment, defendant raises three assignments of error. We reject his first assignment of error without discussion and write to address his contention, in his second and third assignments, that the trial court plainly erred in imposing a unitary assessment and surcharge. See ORAP 5.45(1); Ailes v.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Bachman v. BachmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
  3. State v. LitscherCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2006
  4. State v. QuadeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Chriswisser v. PittsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API