State v. Wilson
| Citation | 208 P.3d 523,228 Or. App. 365 |
| Decision Date | 13 May 2009 |
| Docket Number | A121457.,920834764. |
| Parties | STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Gregory Paul WILSON, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Oregon |
Multnomah County Circuit Court; Kimberly C. Frankel, Judge. (Judgment), Michael J. McShane, Judge. (Amended Judgment).
John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Erika L. Hadlock, Acting Solicitor General, and Paul L. Smith, Assistant Attorney-in-Charge Criminal Appeals, for petition. On the reply were Jerome Lidz, Solicitor General, and Doug M. Petrina, Senior Assistant Attorney General.
Richard L. Wolf, Portland, for response.
Before HASELTON, Presiding Judge, and ARMSTRONG, Judge, and ROSENBLUM, Judge.
The state petitions, based on Oregon v. Ice, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 711, 172 L.Ed.2d 517 (2009), for reconsideration of our decision in this case. State v. Wilson, 216 Or.App. 226, 173 P.3d 150 (2007). For the reasons that follow, we allow reconsideration, withdraw our former disposition, modify our former opinion in part and adhere to it as modified, and affirm.
In Wilson, defendant raised a variety of challenges to his convictions and sentences, and we rejected all of those challenges, except for defendant's contention, based on State v. Ice, 343 Or. 248, 170 P.3d 1049 (2007), that the trial court had erred in imposing a consecutive sentence based on judicial findings. Wilson, 216 Or.App. at 228-37, 173 P.3d 150. Accordingly, we affirmed defendant's convictions and remanded for resentencing. Id.
We agree with the state that, in light of Oregon v. Ice, the trial court did not err in imposing the disputed consecutive sentence. Consequently, we: (1) modify our former opinion to delete those portions that state that State v. Ice is controlling and requires a remand for resentencing, see Wilson, 216 Or.App. at 228, 237, 173 P.3d 150; (2) adhere to our former opinion as so modified; (3) withdraw our prior disposition in light of Oregon v. Ice; and (4) affirm.1
Reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified; affirmed.
1. We agree with the state that, notwithstanding defendant's service of the incarcerative term of the consecutive sentence, because of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Martinez v. Cain
..., 216 Or. App. 226, 236-37, 173 P.3d 150, rev. den. , 334 Or. 391, 181 P.3d 770 (2008), adh'd to as modified on recons. , 228 Or. App. 365, 208 P.3d 523 (2009) (same).1 Moreover, Barrett aside, petitioner's completedrobbery conviction could not merge with his attempted aggravated murder con......
-
State v. Galloway
...App. 226, 234, 173 P.3d 150 (2007), rev. den. , 344 Or. 391, 181 P.3d 770 (2008), adh’d to as modified on recons. , 228 Or. App. 365, 208 P.3d 523 (2009) ( Wilson III ). The "defendant was found guilty of five counts of the lesser-included offense of attempted aggravated murder, each on a d......
-
Koller v. Schmaing
...Wilson, 216 Or.App. 226, 232, 173 P.3d 150 (2007), rev. den.,344 Or. 391, 181 P.3d 770 (2008), adh'd to as modified on recons.,228 Or.App. 365, 208 P.3d 523 (2009) (“[T]he Oregon Supreme Court has repeatedly admonished that the concept of ‘structural error’ is inapposite to Oregon law.”); s......
- State ex rel. Dept. of H.S. v. Broyles, 07C11713.