State v. Padilla

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Sentencing
  • Date Filed: 04-18-2016
  • Case #: A155264
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; DeHoog, J., and De Muniz, S.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under Article I, section 16 of the Oregon Constitution, a sentence is dissproportinate if it would shock a reasonable person's moral sense.

The defendant appealed his first-degree sexual abuse conviction under ORS 163.427. At trial, the state claimed that defendant had sexual contact with a person younger than 14 years by making her touch his genitalia. He claimed that the 75-month mandatory prison sentence under ballot 11 recommended by the prosecutor and imposed by the trial court was erroneous under State v. Rodriguez/ Buck, which found a 75 month prison sentence for first degree sexual abuse arising from a single act and incident as constitutionally disproportionate. The appeals court found that this case did not warrant an Article I, section 16 Oregon constitutional violation because the sentence would not shock reasonable people's moral sense. Specifically, the court found that there were two incidents involving touching, in which one was more severe than the previous.The appeals courts affirmed and disagreed that the sentence was disproportionate. Affirmed.

Advanced Search