State v. Tanner
| Decision Date | 22 October 2003 |
| Citation | 190 Or. App. 299,78 P.3d 132 |
| Parties | STATE of Oregon, Respondent, v. Willie Laron TANNER, Appellant. |
| Court | Oregon Court of Appeals |
Jennelle Meeks Hall, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was David E. Groom, Acting Executive Director, Office of Public Defense Services.
Willie Laron Tanner filed the supplemental brief pro se.
Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Solicitor General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General.
Before EDMONDS, Presiding Judge, and SCHUMAN, Judge, and LEESON, Judge pro tempore.
Defendant appeals his convictions for a number of felonies, making multiple assignments of error. We reject his contentions with one exception, his sentence on count 9, kidnapping in the first degree. We remand for resentencing.
The court sentenced defendant to two upward departures on count 9, which in his case resulted in a minimum sentence of 260 months. However, the crime is a Class A felony with a maximum sentence of 20 years, or 240 months. The state concedes that the sentence that the court imposed exceeds what the statute permits. Although defendant did not object at the time of sentencing, the error is apparent on the face of the record, and we exercise our discretion to review it. See State v. Remme, 173 Or.App. 546, 565-66, 23 P.3d 374 (2001)
.
Sentence on count 9 vacated; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Tanner
...of conduct directed against a different victim, S, on January 31, 1999.2 Defendant appealed those convictions and, in State v. Tanner, 190 Or.App. 299, 78 P.3d 132 (2003), modified on recons., 192 Or.App. 670, 87 P.3d 688, rev. den., 337 Or. 160, 94 P.3d 876 (2004) (Tanner I), we affirmed d......
- State v. Leahy
-
State v. Tanner
...Reconsideration February 6, 2004. PER CURIAM. Defendant seeks reconsideration of our previous decision in this case, State v. Tanner, 190 Or.App. 299, 78 P.3d 132 (2003), arguing that we erred in affirming on an issue on which the state correctly conceded error. We agree and grant Defendant......