State v. Saechao

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Sentencing
  • Date Filed: 04-24-2013
  • Case #: A147305
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Ortega, P.J., for the Court; Nakamoto, J.; and De Muniz, S.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Consecutive minimum sentences are plain error which are properly remanded for resentencing if there is no indication that the trial court will necessarily keep intact the total aggregate sentence.

Defendant was convicted of multiple crimes arising out of a single criminal transaction and sentenced, inter alia, to consecutive sentences of 120 months for attempted aggravated murder with a firearm and 90 months for robbery in the first degree with a firearm, totaling 210 months. Defendant appealed, arguing that imposing multiple minimum sentences is plain error that should be remanded for resentencing. The State concedes the imposition of multiple minimum sentences is plain error, but argued that the case should not be remanded for resentencing because on remand the trial court "would correct its error in a manner that leaves intact defendant's total aggregate sentence." The Court considered the State's concession, the potential impact on the defendant, and the minimal cost of a resentencing hearing and agreed with defendant, holding that remand was proper because there was no indication in the record that the trial court would necessarily keep intact the total aggregate sentence. Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Advanced Search