State v. Pierce

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Sentencing
  • Date Filed: 08-12-2015
  • Case #: A155170
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Lagesen, J. for the Court; Duncan, P.J.; & Flynn, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

When a trial court announces a defendant's sentence on the record and decides what programs they are eligible for under ORS 137.750, the defendant must voice an objection at that point in order to preserve a claim of error that the defendant is eligible for more programs.

Defendant appeals judgment of conviction and sentence and assigns error to the trial court’s determination that she cannot be considered for certain programs under ORS 137.750. Defendant argued the determination was erroneous because the court did not find that there were substantial and compelling reasons to deny her consideration for such programs. The claim of error was not preserved, but Defendant argues that she should be excluded from showing preservation because she had no opportunity to correct the mistake. Defendant argues that she was only first alerted to the error after an amended judgment was issued. As required by statute, the sentence was read in open court, giving Defendant the opportunity to address the trial court on other programs she believed herself eligible for. Absent an inconsistency between the oral, on-the-record disposition and the judgment, Defendant was on notice of the programs she was and was not to be considered for. Affirmed.

Advanced Search