State v. Gonzalez ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                    417
    Submitted March 28; convictions on Counts 1 and 3 for delivery of heroin
    and methamphetamine reversed and remanded for entry of convictions
    for attempted delivery of heroin and methamphetamine, remanded for
    resentencing, otherwise affirmed April 27, 2022
    STATE OF OREGON,
    Plaintiff-Respondent,
    v.
    JULIO GONZALEZ,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    Washington County Circuit Court
    20CR32663; A174555
    509 P3d 190
    Oscar Garcia, Judge.
    Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
    Section, and David O. Ferry, Deputy Public Defender, Office
    of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
    Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
    Solicitor General, and Greg Rios, Assistant Attorney
    General, filed the brief for respondent.
    Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and
    Kamins, Judge.
    PER CURIAM
    Convictions on Counts 1 and 3 for delivery of heroin and
    methamphetamine reversed and remanded for entry of con-
    victions for attempted delivery of heroin and methamphet-
    amine; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
    418                                          State v. Gonzalez
    PER CURIAM
    Defendant was convicted in a bench trial of deliv-
    ery of heroin, ORS 475.850 (Count 1); possession of heroin,
    ORS 475.854 (Count 2); delivery of methamphetamine, ORS
    475.890(2) (Count 3); and possession of methamphetamine,
    ORS 475.894 (Count 4). The state’s theory of delivery at trial
    was based on State v. Boyd, 
    92 Or App 51
    , 
    756 P2d 1276
    ,
    rev den, 
    307 Or 77
     (1988)—possession with intent to deliver.
    In his single assignment of error, defendant contends
    that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment
    of acquittal on the delivery charges. After the filing of defen-
    dant’s brief, we decided State v. Hubbell, 
    314 Or App 844
    ,
    500 P3d 728 (2021), rev allowed, 
    369 Or 504
     (2022), in which
    we overruled Boyd and held that an “attempted transfer” as
    used in the definition of “delivery,” ORS 475.005(8), refers to
    a particular act of transferring, not possession with a more
    generalized intent to deal the drugs at some undetermined
    point in the future. Hubbell, 
    314 Or App at 870
    .
    The state concedes error. We agree and accept the
    state’s concession. As in Hubbell, we conclude that the evi-
    dence here was legally sufficient to support a finding of a
    substantial step toward the completed crimes of delivery
    of heroin and methamphetamine. We therefore reverse the
    delivery convictions on Counts 1 and 3 and remand for entry
    of convictions for the lesser-included crimes of attempted
    delivery of heroin and methamphetamine.
    Convictions on Counts 1 and 3 for delivery of heroin
    and methamphetamine reversed and remanded for entry of
    convictions for attempted delivery of heroin and metham-
    phetamine; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: A174555

Filed Date: 4/27/2022

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/10/2024