STATE v. RAJSAVONG (2021)

Defendant appeals a judgment convicting him of second-degree trespass, ORS 164.245, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, plainly erred in failing to exclude certain evidence, and erred in imposing a $100 bench probation fee that was not announced in open court at sentencing. We reject defendant's argument concerning the sufficiency of the evidence and his argument concerning admissibility of evidence without discussion. With respect to the probation fee, the state concedes the error. We agree that that was error and accept the state's concession.

In State v. Baccaro, 300 Or. App. 131, 133, 452 P.3d 1022 (2019), we explained that imposition of a bench probation fee in a written judgment that had not been announced in the defendant's presence at sentencing was error. We rejected the state's argument that the error was harmless because the fee could not be waived, noting that the court nonetheless retained the authority to suspend execution of that portion of his sentence. Id. at 137, 452 P.3d 1022. Baccaro is controlling here.

Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay $100 bench probation fee vacated; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

PER CURIAM