|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|State of Oregon v. David Frank Lane|
|Supreme Court Case 2|
|Timothy A. Sylwester on behalf of State of Oregon|
Daniel C. Bennett on behalf of David Frank Lane
Statement of Issues:
|State of Oregon v. David Frank Lane (S062045) (A148507) (appeal from Marion County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 260 Or App 549, 318 P3d 750 (2014)).|
The State of Oregon has been granted review of a Court of Appeals decision that, with respect to a trial court's order that some of four prison terms imposed as sanctions for a single violation of a probationary term in four separate probation revocation proceedings were to run consecutively, remanded for entry of a judgment ordering each probationary revocation term to run concurrently instead.
On review, the issue is:
If a defendant is serving multiple probationary sentences imposed on felony convictions that are based on crimes committed against different victims, and the court revokes those probationary sentences based on a finding of a single violation of probation, does Article I, section 44(1)(b), of the Oregon Constitution authorize the court to impose consecutive sentences, despite OAR 213-012-0040(2)(a), which provides that if more than one term of probationary supervision is revoked for a single supervision violation, the sentencing judge shall impose the incarceration sanctions concurrently?
The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.
Justice(s) NOT Participating: