Opinion
A182010
10-30-2024
STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CEOTIS HEARSES ULYSSES RHODES, Defendant-Appellant.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Stephanie J. Hortsch, Deputy Public Defender, Oregon Public Defense Commission, filed the brief for appellant. Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, waived appearance for respondent.
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
Submitted September 13, 2024
Lincoln County Circuit Court 23CR30475; A182010 Sheryl Bachart, Judge.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Stephanie J. Hortsch, Deputy Public Defender, Oregon Public Defense Commission, filed the brief for appellant.
Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, waived appearance for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
LAGESEN, C. J.
Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction entered after he pleaded guilty to the offense of luring a minor, ORS 167.057. His appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 311 Or. 434, 814 P.2d 1069 (1991). The brief does not contain a Section B. See ORAP 5.90(1)(b). We affirm.
As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel. See, e.g., State v. Yother, 310 Or.App. 563, 484 P.3d 1098 (2021) (deciding matter submitted through Balfour process by two-judge panel); Ballinger v. Nooth, 254 Or.App. 402, 295 P.3d 115 (2012), rev den, 353 Or. 747 (2013) (same).
Defendant admitted to sending messages of a sexually explicit nature to a minor for the purpose of inducing the minor to engage in sexual conduct. As part of the plea deal, the state agreed to dismiss a second charge. The trial court sentenced defendant to 14 months in prison and two years of post-prison supervision.
Having reviewed the record, including the trial court file, the transcript of the hearings, and the Balfour brief, and taking into account our statutorily circumscribed authority to review, see ORS 138.105(5), we have identified no arguably meritorious issues.
Affirmed.