STATE v. HANNICK (2021)

Court of Appeals of Oregon.

STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Samantha Lynn HANNICK, Defendant-Appellant.

A169629

Decided: May 26, 2021

Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Kamins, Judge.

Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Nora Coon, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and E. Nani Apo, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for unauthorized use of a vehicle (UUV), ORS 164.135, and possession of a stolen vehicle, ORS 819.300. She argues that the trial court erred in denying her motion for judgment of acquittal on the UUV count. We reject that argument without discussion. Defendant also argues that the trial court plainly erred in imposing $600 in attorney fees because the record does not support a conclusion that she is or may be able to pay them. The state concedes that this constitutes plain error. We agree, accept the state's concession, and, in light of the circumstances and gravity of the error, exercise our discretion to correct it. See generally State v. Harris, 293 Or. App. 110, 111-12, 426 P.3d 252 (2018) (correcting similar error).

Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.

PER CURIAM

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network