From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Lunski

Oregon Court of Appeals
May 2, 1990
791 P.2d 146 (Or. Ct. App. 1990)

Opinion

CR 88-648, CR 88-907; CA A61260 (Control), A61261 (Cases Consolidated)

Argued and submitted March 27, 1990

Affirmed May 2, 1990

Appeal from Benton County, District Court.

Henry R. Dickerson, Judge.

Henry M. Silberblatt, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Acting Public Defender, Salem.

Wendy J. Paris, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

Before Graber, Presiding Judge, and Riggs and Edmonds, Judges.


PER CURIAM

Affirmed.


Defendant appeals from a conviction for contributing to the sexual delinquency of a minor. ORS 163.435. She argues that the trial court erred by failing to specify in its sentence the amount of restitution that she would be required to pay as a condition of her probation. She concedes that she did not make an objection in the trial court, pursuant to ORS 137.106 (3). Her failure to object was a waiver of her rights under that statute. See State v. Carpenter, 101 Or. App. 489, 791 P.2d 145 (1990).

We do not address defendant's other assignment of error, because it lacks merit.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

State v. Lunski

Oregon Court of Appeals
May 2, 1990
791 P.2d 146 (Or. Ct. App. 1990)
Case details for

State v. Lunski

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. CONNIE LOU LUNSKI, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: May 2, 1990

Citations

791 P.2d 146 (Or. Ct. App. 1990)
791 P.2d 146

Citing Cases

State v. Gruver

” Id. See also State v. Miller, 44 Or.App. 625, 627, 606 P.2d 689 (1980) ( “Ordinarily defects in the terms…