STATE v. THOMAS (2020)

Defendant appeals a judgment convicting her of speeding. ORS 811.111. Defendant was issued a citation on December 6, 2018. On January 8, 2019, she filed a plea of not guilty and requested a trial. On January 9, 2019, the court sent out a notice of trial scheduled for February 4, 2019. However, in preparing the notice, the court clerk mistranscribed defendant's address. The notice was returned to the court on January 15, 2019, indicating “return to sender, insufficient address.” On February 4, 2019, the court held a trial in defendant's absence, convicted her of the offense, issued notice of suspension her driver's license, and imposed a fine of $1,150.

On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court erred in holding a trial and convicting her in her absence because she was not given adequate notice of the trial. The state concedes the error, noting that, under ORS 153.073, unless notice is waived by the defendant, the court is required to provide the defendant with “notice of the date, time and place at least five days before the date set for trial,” and, in cases involving traffic violations, the notice must contain a warning that, if the defendant fails to appear, the defendant's driving privileges are subject to suspension. We agree and accept the state's concession. See generally State v. Worthington, 255 Or. App. 177, 296 P.3d 624 (2013) (reversing and remanding in a traffic violation case where there was no evidence that the defendant received notice at least five days before the date set for trial).

Reversed and remanded.

PER CURIAM