State v. Chavez, CR1101865
Decision Date | 21 May 2014 |
Docket Number | A151692.,CR1101865 |
Citation | 263 Or.App. 187,326 P.3d 629 |
Parties | STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Javier A. Hernandez CHAVEZ, Defendant–Appellant. |
Court | Oregon Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Lindsey K. Detweiler, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Michael S. Shin, Senior Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before DUNCAN, Presiding Judge, and HASELTON, Chief Judge.
Defendant was convicted of multiple sexual offenses and sentenced to 300 months in prison. The trial court also ordered defendant to pay $1,600 in court-appointed attorney fees. On appeal, defendant challenges his convictions and the court's imposition of attorney fees. We reject defendant's challenge to his convictions without discussion and write only to address defendant's second assignment of error, which concerns the imposition of attorney fees.
In that second assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred in ordering him to pay court-appointed attorney fees when the record is silent as to whether he “is or may be able” to pay those costs of his defense. SeeORS 151.505(3) (“The court may not require a person to pay costs under this section unless the person is or may be able to pay the costs.”); ORS 161.665(4) (). He acknowledges that he did not preserve that claim of error but urges us to review and correct the error as an “error of law apparent on the record.” ORAP 5.45(1). We agree with defendant that the trial court plainly erred in imposing attorney fees on this record. See State v. Coverstone, 260 Or.App. 714, 716, 320 P.3d 670 (2014) ( ).
We further conclude that, for reasons similar to those in Coverstone, it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the error. First, the error is grave, in that defendant was ordered to pay a substantial sum, $1,600. Second, this is not a case in which the trial court could have made the necessary finding regarding ability to pay if the issue had been brought to its attention; the record...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Frinell
...The state concedes the error. We agree that the court erred in that regard, and that the error is plain. See, e.g. , State v. Chavez , 263 Or. App. 187, 326 P.3d 629, rev. den. , 356 Or. 163, 334 P.3d 971 (2014) (a trial court commits plain error by imposing court-appointed attorney fees wh......
-
State v. Below
...was plain error where the record contained no evidence that the defendant was or might be able to pay the fees); State v. Chavez, 263 Or.App. 187, 188, 326 P.3d 629 (2014) (trial court committed plain error by imposing $1,600 in attorney fees where the record failed to establish that the de......
- State v. Pichardo
-
State v. Rhee
...have made the necessary finding regarding ability to pay if the issue had been brought to its attention.” We agree. See State v. Chavez, 263 Or.App. 187, 326 P.3d 629, rev. den., 356 Or. 163, 334 P.3d 971 (2014) (requiring a defendant to pay court-appointed attorney fees is plain error when......