Summary
reversing and remanding for reconsideration because it was "unclear" whether trial court had relied on an improper basis for revoking probation
Summary of this case from State v. DowtyOpinion
C890525CR; CA A62368
Argued and submitted February 22, 1991.
Reversed and remanded for reconsideration October 30, 1991.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Washington County, Gregory E. Milnes, Judge.
Theresa M. Welch, Wilsonville, argued the cause for appellant. On the brief was M. Janise Augur, Tigard.
Jonathan H. Fussner, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
Defendant was convicted of driving while suspended, a class C felony, and was placed on five years probation. Subsequently, his probation was revoked. There were three alleged violations: (1) he failed to abide by certain directions of his probation officer; (2) he changed his residence without permission; and (3) he consumed alcoholic liquor. The court discussed all three allegations as bases for revoking defendant's probation. Defendant appeals.
The state points out that abstaining from alcohol was not a condition of defendant's probation, and it concedes that revoking the probation on that ground would have been a mistake. Because it is unclear whether the consumption of alcohol was a basis for revoking the probation, we remand for reconsideration.
Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.