DocketNumber: CR91-0054, CR91-0055, CR91-0056, CR91-0057, CR91-0058, CR91-0059, CR91-0060, CR91-0061, CR-91-0127; CA A85919, A85920, A85921, A85922, A85923, A85924, A85925, A85926, A85927
Citation Numbers: 137 Or. App. 108, 903 P.2d 391, 1995 Ore. App. LEXIS 1393
Judges: Landau, Leeson, Riggs
Filed Date: 9/27/1995
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/18/2024
Defendant appeals from a judgment entered after his convictions on four counts of unlawful taking of wildlife, ORS 498.012, four counts of unlawful sale of wildlife, ORS 498.022, and one count of failure to keep or submit fish records, ORS 508.540. He assigns error to the sentences imposed. We write only to address his first two assignments of error.
On December 16, 1991, the trial court sentenced defendant to one year in jail on one count of unlawful taking of wildlife, suspended imposition of sentence on the remaining eight counts and placed defendant on probation for eight consecutive two-year periods. It also suspended his hunting and fishing privileges “for life,” imposed a fine and ordered restitution. Defendant appealed and the state conceded error. We accepted its concession and remanded for resentencing. State v. Lewis, 121 Or App 199, 853 P2d 325, rev den 317 Or 486 (1993).
On September 12, 1994, the trial court resentenced defendant on each of the nine counts as follows: It suspended execution of a sentence of 180 days in jail, placed him on probation for three years with each of the nine probation terms to run concurrently from the date of resentencing, ordered him to perform 40 hours of community service as a condition of probation on each sentence, and suspended his hunting and fishing privileges for two years beginning September 12, 1994. Defendant’s first argument is that the trial court erred by imposing a total of more than five years of probation. ORS 137.010(4).
Defendant next contends that the trial court exceeded its authority in suspending his hunting and fishing privileges for more than two years.
In the original sentencing proceeding, the trial court erroneously revoked defendant’s hunting and fishing privileges for life. By the time he was resentenced, the maximum two-year revocation period had expired. ORS 497.435. The state concedes that the trial court exceeded its statutory authority by revoking defendant’s hunting and fishing privileges for an additional two years. We accept that concession and vacate that portion of the September 12,1994, order that suspended defendant’s hunting and fishing privileges.
Remanded for resentencing with instructions that any imposition of probation not extend beyond December 15, 1996; portion of September 12,1994, order suspending defendant’s hunting and fishing privileges vacated; otherwise affirmed.
ORS 137.010(4) provides, in part:
“If the court suspends the imposition or execution of a part of a sentence for an offense, * * * the court may also impose and execute a sentence of probation on the defendant for a definite or indefinite period of not more than five years.”