State v. Velasquez-Orozco, A160337
| Court | Court of Appeals of Oregon |
| Writing for the Court | PER CURIAM. |
| Citation | 398 P.3d 501,285 Or.App. 881 |
| Decision Date | 01 June 2017 |
| Docket Number | A160337 |
| Parties | STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Selvyn Julian VELASQUEZ-OROZCO, Defendant-Appellant. |
285 Or.App. 881
398 P.3d 501
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Selvyn Julian VELASQUEZ-OROZCO, Defendant-Appellant.
A160337
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Submitted April 26, 2017.
June 1, 2017
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Mary M. Reese, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Shannon T. Reel, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Sercombe, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and Haselton, Senior Judge.
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for one count of first-degree sodomy, ORS 163.405, three counts of second-degree sodomy, ORS 163.395, and three counts of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427, raising two assignments of error. We reject without discussion defendant's second assignment of error, and write to address his first assignment of error. In that assignment, defendant, who was sentenced to a total of 325 months in prison, challenges the trial court's imposition of $2,030 in extradition costs.1 He asserts that the court failed to make a finding regarding his ability to pay those costs and that, in any event, the record would not support a finding that he is or may be able to pay them. See ORS 161.665(4) ("The court may not sentence a defendant to pay costs under this section unless the defendant is or may be able to pay them."); State v. Pendergrapht , 251 Or.App. 630, 633, 284 P.3d 573 (2012) (a court lacks authority to require a defendant to pay costs unless it has determined that the defendant is or may be able to pay them); see also State v. Kanuch , 231 Or.App. 20, 24, 217 P.3d 1082 (2009) (the state "bears the burden of persuasion and the obligation to make a record" regarding a defendant's ability to pay costs). Although the asserted error in unpreserved, defendant urges us to review and correct it as plain error. See ORAP 5.45(1).
We agree with defendant that the record does not show that the state met its burden of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Turner, A176403
...ability to pay. The state further agrees that plain error review is appropriate under our case law. See State v. Velasquez-Orozco, 285 Or.App. 881, 882, 398 P.3d 501, rev den, 361 Or. 801 (2017). We agree with and accept the state's concession. Furthermore, we conclude that it is appropriat......
-
State v. Turner, A176403
...ability to pay. The state further agrees that plain error review is appropriate under our case law. See State v. Velasquez-Orozco, 285 Or.App. 881, 882, 398 P.3d 501, rev den, 361 Or. 801 (2017). We agree with and accept the state's concession. Furthermore, we conclude that it is appropriat......