Opinion

State v. Birchard

  • 105 Or. App. 402
  • 804 P.2d 1225
  • 1991 Ore. App. LEXIS 121
Court
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Filed
Jan 23, 1991
Status
Published
On the bench
Edmonds, Riggs, Warren
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 59.0%

The opinion

PER CURIAM

Defendant was charged and convicted in Umatilla County for attempted murder and attempted first degree robbery. At the sentencing on those convictions, the trial court imposed two mandatory minimum five-year sentences for the use of a gun under ORS 161.610. The state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing the second “gun minimum.” State v. Haywood, 73 Or App 6 , 697 P2d 977 (1985). We agree. See State v. Birchard (A62487), 105 Or App 400 , 804 P2d 1224 (1991).

Although the sentences imposed were concurrent and no error was preserved, there may be collateral consequences as a result of imposition of the second five-year minimum. Therefore, we remand for resentencing. State v. Brown, 310 Or 347 , 800 P2d 259 (1990).

There is no merit in defendant’s other assignments of error.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.