From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Johnson

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 22, 1993
842 P.2d 819 (Or. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

91-832-C-1; CA A71401

Argued and submitted December 7, 1992

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing December 30, 1992 Appellant's petition for reconsideration denied April 21, 1993 Petition for review denied June 22, 1993 ( 317 Or. 163) Respondent's motion for reconsideration allowed by opinion April 21, 1993 See 119 Or. App. 494 (1993)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County.

L.A. Merryman, Judge.

Gary D. Babcock, Salem, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.

Janet A. Klapstein, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Charles S. Crookham, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.


Defendant appeals his convictions for two counts of burglary in the first degree, ORS 164.225, and criminal trespass in the first degree, ORS 164.255. We affirm the convictions without discussion and write only to address the sentence.

The court "merged" the convictions and sentenced defendant to 30 years under the dangerous offender statute, ORS 161.725, with a 15-year minimum term. The court imposed an alternative 20-year sentence under the sentencing guidelines. The state concedes that the court erred in imposing an indeterminate sentence under the dangerous offender statute. State v. Serhienko, 111 Or. App. 604, 826 P.2d 114 (1992). We accept that concession.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for resentencing.


Summaries of

State v. Johnson

Oregon Court of Appeals
Jun 22, 1993
842 P.2d 819 (Or. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

State v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. DWAYNE JOHNSON, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Jun 22, 1993

Citations

842 P.2d 819 (Or. Ct. App. 1993)
842 P.2d 819

Citing Cases

Johnson v. Zenon

The prejudicial (undue) impact from proof of the California rape is simply impossible to assess. Brief for…

Johnson v. Zenon

We accept that concession." State v. Johnson (A71401), 117 Or. App. 531, 532, 842 P.2d 819, rev den 317 Or.…