History
  • No items yet
midpage
State v. Tanner
192 Or. App. 670
Or. Ct. App.
2004
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM

Defendant seeks reconsideration of our previous decision in this case, State v. Tanner, 190 Or App 299, 78 P3d 132 (2003), arguing that we erred in affirming on an issue on which the state correctly conceded error. We agree and grant reconsideration.

Defendant was convicted of numerous felonies. The trial court imposed dangerous offender sentences under ORS 161.725(1)(b) or (c) on several Class B felonies in the absence of a jury’s determination of the necessary underlying facts. As the state concedes, that action was erroneous and requires resentencing. State v. Mitchell, 84 Or App 452, 457-58, 734 P2d 379, rev den, 303 Or 590 (1987).

We adhere to our previous conclusion that the trial court erred in sentencing defendant to two upward departures on count 9, resulting in a minimum sentence of 260 months for a Class A felony that had a maximum sentence of 20 years, or 240 months. See State v. Remme, 173 Or App 546, 565-66, 23 P3d 374 (2001). We also adhere to our rejection of defendant’s other assignments of error.

Reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn; dangerous offender sentences on counts 3, 4, 5, 6, and 10 vacated; sentence on count 9 vacated; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Tanner
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Date Published: Jun 15, 2004
Citation: 192 Or. App. 670
Docket Number: 990231447; A111473
Court Abbreviation: Or. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.