Stave v. Diaz-Guillen

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Sentencing
  • Date Filed: 08-17-2011
  • Case #: A140727
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; & Landau, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Where a trial court ran erroneous sentences concurrently with other lawful sentences, such errors are harmless and not grave; therefore there is no requirement to remand the case for resentencing.

Defendant was convicted of two counts of attempted aggravated murder, two counts of assault in the first degree, two counts of unlawful use of a weapon, one count of burglary in the first degree, one count of a felon in possession of a firearm, and two counts of tampering with a witness. On appeal t defendant argued that the trial court erred in imposing sentences in excess of the statutory maximum term of imprisonment for a Class C felony. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s sentencing and held that the unlawful sentences - both with respect to the terms of imprisonment and the terms of post-prison supervision - were valid due to the fact that those sentences would run concurrently with the other longer, lawful, sentences placed upon defendant. The Court of Appeals noted that the errors were harmless and that if the case were remanded to the trial court there would be no practical effect on the defendant's total aggregate sentence.

Advanced Search