State v. Riley, S51963.
| Citation | 340 Or. 673,136 P.3d 743 |
| Decision Date | 23 May 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. S51963.,S51963. |
| Parties | STATE v. RILEY |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
Petition for review denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
7 cases
-
State v. Horner
...violated his constitutional and statutory right “to be present when a court effects a sentence modification.” See State v. Riley, 195 Or.App. 377, 384, 97 P.3d 1269 (2004), rev. den., 340 Or. 673, 136 P.3d 743 (2006) (explaining that a defendant's right to be present is implicated when the ......
-
State v. Champagne
...prejudice from the lack of notice. Our cases are generally consistent with that distinction, even if they have not always said as much. In Riley, the trial court modified a judgment to conform to what the law required. 195 Or.App. at 383. It did so under the earlier version of the statute a......
-
State v. Rickard, 96CR0088.
...opposed to "administrative" in character. State v. DeCamp, 158 Or.App. 238, 242, 973 P.2d 922 (1999). We noted in State v. Riley, 195 Or.App. 377, 384, 97 P.3d 1269 (2004), rev. den., 340 Or. 673, 136 P.3d 743 "When the modification is administrative as opposed to substantive, that is, when......
-
State v. Mayes
...extends to changes in a sentence that are `substantive' as opposed to `administrative' in character." See also State v. Riley, 195 Or.App. 377, 384, 97 P.3d 1269 (2004), rev. den., 340 Or. 673, 136 P.3d 743 (2006) ("When the modification is administrative as opposed to substantive, that is,......
Request a trial to view additional results