Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1972

State v. Hatcher

Court of Appeals of Oregon · Decided September 8, 1972 · Langtry, Schwab, Thornton

10 Or. App. 487; 500 P.2d 737; 1972 Ore. App. LEXIS 868

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was charged with criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor, in violation of ORS 164.255. *488lie pled guilty and was sentenced to the maximum punishment provided by ORS 161.615 and 161.635,① i.e., one year in the county jail and $1,000 fine.

He appeals contending that the sentence is in excess of that provided by law.

ORS 137.010(5)② expressly authorizes the imposition of both imprisonment and a fine.

The sentence imposed on defendant is within the limits prescribed by law. Defendant’s contention is without merit.

Affirmed.

ORS 161.615 provides:

“Sentences for misdemeanors shall be for a definite term. The court shall fix the term of imprisonment within the following maximum limitations:

“(1) For a Class A misdemeanor, 1 year.

ORS 161.635 provides:

“(1) A sentence to pay a fine for a misdemeanor shall be a sentence to pay an amount, fixed by the court, not exceeding:

“(a) $1,000 for a Class A misdemeanor.

ORS 137.010(5) provides:

“When a person is convicted of an offense and the court does not suspend the imposition or execution of sentence or when a suspended sentence or probation is revoked, the court shall impose the following sentence:

“(a) A term of imprisonment; or

“(b) A fine; or

“(c) Both imprisonment and a fine; or

“(d) Discharge of the defendant.”

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.