State v. Jacquez

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
  • Date Filed: 05-11-2016
  • Case #: A157559
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; Tookey, J.; & DeHoog, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 161.635, trial courts have the authority to impose fines for Class A misdemeanors without making any findings or following any particular procedures and those decisions are not appealable unless the fine exceeds the statutory maximum.

Defendant appealed the trial court’s imposition of fines at sentencing and argued that ORS 811.182(5) requires minimum fines only if the underlying suspension is the result of a DUII conviction and that, because Defendant’s suspension did not result from a DUII, the minimums did not apply. The Court stated that Defendant’s argument, that the trial court imposed the fines by authority of ORS 811.182(5), is incorrect because it requires the trial court to impose minimum fines in certain cases, but it does not establish the trial court’s underlying authority to impose fines. Instead, the Court stated that it lacks jurisdiction under ORS 138.050(1)(a) to consider Defendant’s appeal, because the fines do not exceed the maximum allowable by law. Unlike ORS 811.182(5), ORS 161.635(1)(a) gives trial courts authority to impose fines for Class A misdemeanors. The Court held that since ORS 161.635(1)(a) does not require the trial court to make any findings or follow particular procedures before imposing a fine, and because the trial court acted correctly under the authority of ORS 161.635(1)(a), Defendant’s appeal failed to establish that the fines imposed exceeded the maximum allowable by law. Appeal dismissed.

Advanced Search