254 Or. App. 746 295 P.3d 693

Submitted December 5, 2012,

reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn; in Case No. 10C42507, remanded for resentencing, otherwise affirmed; in Case No. 10C41319, affirmed January 30, 2013

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ADAM COREY WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

Marion County Circuit Court

10C41319, 10C42507 A145773 (Control), A145774

295 P3d 693

Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Anne Fujita Munsey, Senior Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, for petition.

Before Armstrong, Presiding Judge, and Duncan, Judge, and Brewer, Judge pro tempore.

PER CURIAM

*747PER CURIAM

Defendant petitions for reconsideration of our decision in State v. Williams, 253 Or App 608, 293 P3d 1091 (2012), in which we affirmed without opinion the trial court’s judgments in two cases that were consolidated on appeal, Marion County Case Nos. 10C41319 and 10C42507. He argues that we instead should have remanded for resentencing, based on his third assignment of error, in which he argued — and the state conceded — that the trial court had erred in sentencing him as a repeat property offender under ORS 137.717 (2009)1 on one of the counts for which he was convicted because it relied on a conviction that was not a qualifying offense. Defendant is correct.

On Count 2 in Case No. 10C42507, the trial court sentenced defendant as a repeat property offender under ORS 137.717, using defendant’s conviction for theft of services in Case No. 10C41319 as one of the four predicate convictions required under that statute to impose a repeat property offender sentence. Theft of services, ORS 164.125,2 is not a qualifying predicate offense that can give rise to a repeat property offense sentence. ORS 137.717(2) (listing qualifying offenses). Thus, as the state concedes, the court erred.

In his brief on appeal, defendant asserted that the proper remedy for that error is to remand for resentencing in Case No. 10C42507. Although defendant now requests that we remand both cases for resentencing, we allow reconsideration only as to the narrow issue discussed above and grant defendant the relief that he requested on appeal.

Reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn; in Case No. 10C42507, remanded for resentencing, otherwise affirmed; in Case No. 10C41319, affirmed.

State v. Williams
254 Or. App. 746 295 P.3d 693

Case Details

Name
State v. Williams
Decision Date
Jan 30, 2013
Citations

254 Or. App. 746

295 P.3d 693

Jurisdiction
Oregon

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!