From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Hamilton

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 10, 2009
229 Or. App. 94 (Or. Ct. App. 2009)

Opinion

Nos. 001239970; A135407.

Argued and submitted on December 30, 2008.

June 10, 2009.

Appeal from the Multnomah County Circuit Court, Jerry B. Hodson, Judge.

Robin A. Jones, Senior Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, Legal Services Division, Office of Public Defense Services.

Albert L. Hamilton filed appellant's supplemental brief pro se.

Janet A. Klapstein, Senior Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General.

Before Sercombe, Presiding Judge, and BREWER, Chief Judge, and Deits, Senior Judge.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


Defendant assigns error to the failure to merge his robbery convictions under ORS 161.067(2). We determined in State v. Williams, 229 Or App 79, 209 P3d 842 (2009), in similar circumstances, that, under ORS 161.067(2), robbery crimes committed against more than one victim do not merge. Defendant's pro se supplemental brief challenges the imposition of consecutive sentences without jury findings, an issue decided against him by Oregon v. Ice, 555 US ___, 129 S Ct 711, 172 L Ed 2d 517 (2009).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Hamilton

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 10, 2009
229 Or. App. 94 (Or. Ct. App. 2009)
Case details for

State v. Hamilton

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ALBERT LEWIS HAMILTON, aka…

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Jun 10, 2009

Citations

229 Or. App. 94 (Or. Ct. App. 2009)
209 P.3d 851

Citing Cases

State v. Hamilton

The Court of Appeals affirmed, citing its decision in State v. Williams, 229 Or App 79, 209 P3d 842, rev den,…

State v. Hamilton

October 7, 2009. Appeal from the 229 Or App 94. Petitions for Review…