263 P.3d 1107
Or. Ct. App.2011Background
- Defendant Wilson was convicted of DUII after a stipulated-facts trial in Oregon, case 09C40480; A142749.
- At sentencing, the judgment bore a preprinted line: DUII conviction fee of $230.
- Statutes require a $130 DUII conviction fee under ORS 813.020(1)(a) and ORS 813.030 (2009 version).
- The State conceded the fee exceeded the statutory amount, but argued the court should not correct it under Ailes discretion.
- Defendant argued the higher fee was improper and that the error warranted relief; preservation issues were raised.
- Court remanded for resentencing to correct the fee, and otherwise affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the $230 DUII fee proper under ORS 813.020/813.030? | State concedes the fee exceeds statute. | Wilson contends the fee is unlawful. | Fee exceeds statute; remanded for resentencing. |
| Whether the error was preserved for review | State relies on Ailes discretion to address clerical errors. | Wilson lacked preservation due to late-stage entry of judgment. | Preservation not required; merits addressed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Peeples v. Lampert, 345 Or. 209 (2008) (preservation rules may yield when no practical ability to object; pragmatic exceptions)
- Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc., 312 Or. 376 (1991) (courts may review for clerical/arithmetic errors under sentencing)