State v. Wolfgang

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Law
  • Date Filed: 06-15-2016
  • Case #: A156467
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Garrett, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; & Lagesen, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 131.505(4), when a defendant is found guilty of more than one criminal offense that arises out of a continuous and uninterrupted course of conduct, the sentences imposed for the resulting convictions must be concurrent.

Defendant appealed a judgment by the trial court convicting him of murder and first-degree assault. On appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court (1) erred when it denied his motion to suppress statements to police because the statements were involuntary and violated his constitutional rights against compelled self-incrimination, and (2) erred by imposing a partially consecutive sentence on the assault conviction. For the first assignment of error, defendant further argues that his confession was induced by a promise of leniency or immunity. This Court holds that Defendant attributed his lack of capacity for self-determination at the time of his confession to his hypoglycemic condition and not to a promise of leniency or immunity. Therefore, this assignment of error was not preserved.

For the second assignment of error, Defendant further argues that the two beatings were separated in time by only 15 minutes and were directed towards a single criminal objective, which was to incapacitate the victim. This Court finds that Defendant focuses on the criminal objective and not on the fact that the conduct was not continuous and uninterrupted, that Defendant had enough time in between the two crimes to do other things, and that Defendant was able to reform a state of mind and intent before coming back to commit a second assault. This Court holds that the trial court did not err and its findings support an imposition of a partially consecutive sentence under ORS 131.505(4) or ORS 137.123(2). Affirmed.

Advanced Search