State v. Spynu

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Sentencing
  • Date Filed: 05-11-2016
  • Case #: A156548
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Lagesen, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; & Garrett, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

When applying ORS 137.717, acts are considered to be part of the same criminal episode when they are so closely linked in time, place, and circumstance that a complete account of a charge cannot be related without relating the details of another charge.

Defendant appealed a judgment of conviction for multiple counts of theft and making false health care claims under ORS 165.692, 164.057, and 164.055, after she submitted vouchers to DHS for payment for home heath care services and insurance premiums while caring for her mother. Defendant challenged the sentence imposed because because the trial court determined that two counts were not part of the same criminal episode, and applied ORS 137.717 to give Defendant an enhanced sentence for a repeat property offender. On appeal, Defendant argued the trial court erred in applying ORS 137.717 because all of her crimes were committed as part of a continuous and uninterrupted course of conduct in furtherance of a single criminal objective. The Court held that because the counts that were separated at trial were not so closely linked in time, place, and circumstance that a complete account of those charges could not be related without relating the details of the other charges, the trial court did not err in finding that each theft resulted from Defendant’s act of submitting distinct false vouchers at distinct times and accepting separate payments and benefits on those vouchers. Affirmed.

Advanced Search