Opinion
8903-31129; CA A87799
Submitted on record and briefs October 18, 1995, conviction affirmed; remanded for entry of corrected judgment April 17, 1996
Appeal from Circuit Court, Multnomah County.
Dorothy M. Baker, Judge.
Sally L. Avera, Public Defender, and David E. Groom, Deputy Public Defender, filed the brief for appellant.
Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Jonathan H. Fussner, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Richardson, Chief Judge, and Deits and De Muniz, Judges.
PER CURIAM
Conviction affirmed; remanded for entry of a corrected judgment.
Defendant pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance and was sentenced to five years' imprisonment. Execution of the sentence was suspended, and he was placed on probation for five years. Subsequently, his probation was revoked, and the trial court ordered execution of the previously imposed sentence. The court also ordered the sentence to be served consecutively to a sentence defendant was currently serving in the state of Washington.
Defendant committed the offense before the effective date of the sentencing guidelines.
Defendant contends that the trial court has no authority, after revoking probation in this case, to modify a sentence previously imposed by ordering that it be served consecutively to another sentence. The state concedes error and we agree. State v. Debusman, 102 Or. App. 119, 792 P.2d 115 (1990); Fergelic v. Cupp, 53 Or. App. 190, 631 P.2d 800, rev den 292 Or. 108 (1981).
Conviction affirmed; remanded for entry of a corrected judgment.