State v. Vierria

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 06-08-2016
  • Case #: A155681
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, P.J., for the Court; Lagesen, J.; & Flynn, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

A criminal defendant, in his right to court-appointed counsel, does not have a right to another court-appointed attorney in the absence of a legitimate complaint concerning the one already appointed. A sentence for the crime of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (UUV) may not exceed a maximum indeterminate sentence of 60 months.

Defendant appealed conviction for, among other charges, one count of unauthorized use of a motor vehicle (UUV). He argued that the trial court erroneously denied his motion for substitution of counsel, contending that he had lodged legitimate complaints against his appointed counsel. He also argued that the sentence imposed for his UUV conviction exceeded the statutory maximum indeterminate sentence of 60 months. The Court rejected the first assignment of error, as Defendant failed to lodge a legitimate complaint about his appointed counsel, and thus had “no right to have another court-appointed lawyer in the absence of a legitimate complaint concerning the one already appointed for him.” State v. Smith, 339 Or. 515, 523 (2005). Regarding the second assignment of error, the Court held the trial court plainly erred in imposing a combined 66-month sentence for conviction for UUV, for which the statutory maximum is 60 months. Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

Advanced Search