State v. Merrill , 314 Or. App. 460 ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                                     460
    On respondent’s petition for reconsideration filed June 10; reconsideration
    allowed, former disposition withdrawn, opinion (
    311 Or App 487
    , 492 P3d 722)
    modified and adhered to as modified, affirmed September 9, 2021
    STATE OF OREGON,
    Plaintiff-Respondent,
    v.
    JULIE MARIE MERRILL,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Douglas County Circuit Court
    16CR15177; A167806
    495 P3d 219
    George William Ambrosini, Judge.
    Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
    Solicitor General, and Robert M. Wilsey, Assistant Attorney
    General, for petition.
    Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and Powers, Judge,
    and Sercombe, Senior Judge.
    PER CURIAM
    Reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn;
    opinion modified and adhered to as modified; affirmed.
    Cite as 
    314 Or App 460
     (2021)                               461
    PER CURIAM
    The state has petitioned for reconsideration of our
    decision in State v. Merrill, 
    311 Or App 487
    , 492 P3d 722
    (2021). The state argues that defendant’s second assignment
    of error, which challenged the trial court’s imposition of a
    $490 state obligation was moot at the time we decided the
    appeal because the trial court, after the briefing and sub-
    mission of this appeal, entered an amended judgment delet-
    ing that obligation. The state requests that we modify our
    decision
    “by: (1) removing the discussion of the ‘state obligation’
    at 
    311 Or App 496
    -97; (2) noting that defendant’s sec-
    ond assignment of error became moot upon entry of the
    amended judgment; and (3) changing this court’s disposi-
    tion to ‘Affirmed.’ ”
    Defendant has not opposed the petition, and we
    agree with the state’s proposed modification. Because the
    trial court had properly and helpfully fixed the problem
    identified in defendant’s second assignment of error by the
    time we rendered our decision, the second assignment of
    error is moot and provides no basis for reversal. See State
    v. Porter, 
    313 Or App 565
    , 568, 494 P3d 988 (2021) (noting
    that amended judgments can moot assignments of error
    by resolving issues raised by them). Accordingly, we allow
    reconsideration, withdraw our prior disposition, and modify
    our opinion in two ways.
    First, we replace the final sentence of the first para-
    graph with the following: “Regarding the financial obliga-
    tion, during the pendency of this appeal, the trial court
    issued an amended judgment deleting it, so that assignment
    of error is now moot.”
    Second, we delete the final full paragraph of the
    opinion, addressing the state obligation.
    Reconsideration allowed; former disposition with-
    drawn; opinion modified and adhered to as modified;
    affirmed.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A167806

Citation Numbers: 314 Or. App. 460

Filed Date: 9/9/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/10/2024