|CALENDAR STATUS: Active|
|State of Oregon v. Carrie Lynn Wilson|
|Supreme Court Courtroom|
|Andrew Lavin on behalf of State of Oregon|
Ingrid MacFarlane on behalf of Carrie Lynn Wilson
Statement of Issues:
|State of Oregon v. Carrie Lynn Wilson (S060198) (A144705) (appeal from Deschutes County Circuit Court; opinion reported at 247 Or App 761, 270 P3d 411 (2012)).|
Defendant Carrie Lynn Wilson has been granted review of a per curiam Court of Appeals decision reversing and remanding a trial court decision that declined to terminate defendant's diversion agreement for failure to pay the diversion filing fee within the diversion period, that concluded that defendant had successfully completed diversion, and that ultimately dismissed the driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII) charge against defendant.
On review, the issues are:
(1) Do the DUII diversion statutes require the diversion filing fee to be paid within the diversion period before a court is authorized to dismiss a DUII charge?
(2) Did the diversion agreement that defendant signed require her to pay the diversion filing fee within the diversion period before she was eligible for dismissal of her DUII charge?
(3) Does a trial court retain discretion to permit the dismissal of a DUII charge if, due to indigency, the diversion filing fee has not been paid at the end of the diversion period?
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: