Breece v. Amsberry

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Post-Conviction Relief
  • Date Filed: 07-27-2016
  • Case #: A157259
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; DeHoog, J.; & Edmonds, S.J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 138.640(1), a post-conviction court is barred from entering an ambiguous judgment. Where a post-conviction court errs by entering an ambiguous judgment, the remedy is to vacate and remand the decision back to the post-conviction court.

Breece appealed the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that the post-conviction court entered an impermissibly ambiguous judgment in violation of ORS 138.640(1). The Court of Appeals held the post-conviction court’s judgment was impermissibly ambiguous because the order was unclear whether Breece’s petition for relief was dismissed as time-barred or as meritless. The Court further held that under Delzell v. Coursey, 354 Or. 597, 318 P.3d 749 (2013), where the post-conviction court errs by entering an ambiguous judgment, vacating and remanding the decision is an appropriate remedy. Vacated and remanded.

Advanced Search