State v. Bowen, 282 P.3d 807

Defendant was convicted in 2003 of aggravated murder and intentional murder across multiple counts involving two victims, with death sentences imposed on the Christiansen counts and a separate sentence on the intentional murder count.
This court, in Bowen I (2006), held that the trial court erred under ORS 161.067(1) by not merging aggravated murder verdicts and the intentional murder verdict into a single judgment with one death sentence.
On remand, the trial court denied several defense motions and entered a new judgment merging the convictions and imposing death, but did not separately enumerate aggravating factors.
Defendant challenged remand actions via three motions: ORS 138.012-style resentencing, a new trial based on a stun device, and a speedy-trial claim based on delay.
This court reviews those remand decisions for prejudicial error and compliance with Bowen I’s remand instruction.
The court ultimately affirms most rulings but reverses the corrected judgment for failure to enumerate aggravating factors and remands for a new corrected judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Scope of remand under ORS 138.012(2)(a)	Bowen I remand only corrected judgment not new sentencing	Remand permitted new sentencing under ORS 138.012(2)(a)	Remand limited to corrected judgment; no new sentencing required
Form of judgment on remand and enumeration of aggravators	Corrected judgment sufficient if merged; no need to enumerate aggravators separately	Aggravating factors must be separately enumerated in the merged judgment	Corrected judgment must separately enumerate aggravating factors underlying merged convictions
Stun device new trial on remand	Remand allows renewed consideration	Issue should have been relitigated; new trial warranted	Remand denied for new trial on stun-device issue
Speedy-trial challenge on remand	Delays violated Article I, section 10 and the Sixth Amendment	Bowen I’s affirmation of convictions meant no prejudice from delay	Delay did not prejudice defendant; no constitutional violation; denial affirmed

State v. Bowen, 340 Or 487 (2006) (Bowen I—merger error; remand for corrected judgment)
State v. Gibson, 338 Or 560 (2005) (remand for corrected judgment in multi-conviction, single death sentence)
State v. Hale, 335 Or 612 (2003) (same-venue merger and corrected-judgment principles)
State v. Barrett, 331 Or 27 (2000) (renewed sentencing after corrected judgment when multiple life terms involved)
State v. Crotsley, 308 Or 272 (1989) (ORI 161.067(1) history; multiple offenses in a single episode)
State v. Harberts, 331 Or 72 (2000) (speedy-trial considerations in delay analysis)