Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Gentle

Court of Appeals of Oregon

September 18, 2019

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
ROBERT R. GENTLE, Defendant-Appellant.

          Submitted May 31, 2019; on respondent's amended motion to dismiss fled August 20, 2019.

          Lake County Circuit Court 17CR84978; Robert F. Nichols, Jr, Judge.

          Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Rond Chananudech, Deputy Public Defender, Offce of Public Defense Services, fled the brief for appellant.

          Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, fled the brief for respondent.

          Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Shorr, Judge.

         Appeal dismissed.

         [299 Or.App. 509] PER CURIAM

         Defendant appeals a judgment in which the court imposed a sentence of probation. He assigns error to six special conditions of probation, contending that the sentencing court erred by imposing the conditions because they were not announced in defendant's presence before they appeared in the judgment. We dismiss the appeal as moot.

         While this appeal was pending, defendant's 18-month probation term expired. We asked the parties to notify this court of their positions on whether the appeal should be dismissed as moot. Defendant responded that four of his six assignments of error "are probably moot" due to the expiration of his term of probation, but that his first two assignments of error had not become moot because the challenged judgment provisions could have collateral effects. The state contends that the appeal is moot, and it moves to dismiss the appeal under ORAP 8.45.

         Defendant's first two assignments of error challenge the following provisions of the judgment, which are identified as special conditions of probation:

"Defendant shall:
''*****
"Defendant stipulates [sic] to pay restitution to all victims.
"Stipulate to destruction or forfeiture of any seized ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.