Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Kandi Lucile CROW, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals a judgment revoking her probation. Defendant assigns error to the trial court’s imposition of $110 in court-appointed attorney fees and a $25 probation-violation fee. Defendant argues that the trial court erred when it ordered her to pay those fees because the court entered them in the judgment without first announcing in court that it would impose them. Defendant requests that we remand the case for resentencing. The state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing attorney fees for the first time in the judgment. However, the state argues that, because it agrees with defendant that that error requires a remand, we need not reach defendant’s assignment of error to the court’s imposition of the probation-violation fee. We agree with and accept the state’s concession regarding the attorney fees and, accordingly, reverse the imposition of those fees. See State v. White, 269 Or. App. 255, 256-57, 344 P.3d 510, rev. den., 357 Or. 300, 353 P.3d 595 (2015) (accepting state’s concession that trial court erred in imposing court-appointed attorney fees for the first time in the judgment). Also, because the parties agree that the error in this case necessitates a remand for resentencing, we do not reach defendant’s argument regarding the imposition of the probation-violation fee.
Portion of judgment imposing court-appointed attorney fees reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: A162791
Decided: May 31, 2018
Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)