State v. Kinney

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Appellate Procedure
  • Date Filed: 08-13-2014
  • Case #: A146976
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Wollheim, J. for the Court; Duncan P.J.; and Schuman S.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

A trial court may deny self-representation on an anticipated disruption of the judicial process.

Defendant appealed convictions in two cases that were consolidated for trial. In case 1 he was convicted of possession of cocaine and driving while suspended or revoked. In case 2 he was convicted of driving while suspended or revoked. Defendant argued four assignments of error. The first two errors Defendant argued that the trial court erred when it failed to allow jury to determine whether the two counts of driving while suspended or revoked were Class B felonies. The Court declined to review this argument because Defendant invited the error. Defense counsel explicitly stated that the issue was of law and not of fact. The third error pertains to the trial court's ruling that denied Defendant's request to represent himself. The trial court found that the Defendant could not act without disrupting the process of the court of obeying rules of procedure. The Court held that the trial court did not err in denying Defendant's request for self-representation. Lastly. Defendant argued that the court erred in doubling his sanctions for summary contempt. During trial Defendant was cited twelve times for contempt. The State conceded that there was error. The Court held that the effect of the trial court's modifications increased the Defendant's contempt sanctions from 12 to 24. Punitive contempt citations reversed and remanded; otherwise affirmed.

Advanced Search