Court of Appeals of Oregon, 2021

State v. Frazier

State v. Frazier
Court of Appeals of Oregon · Decided November 17, 2021
315 Or. App. 687; 498 P.3d 882

State v. Frazier

Opinion

Submitted October 27; remanded for resentencing, otherwise affirmed November 17, 2021; petition for review denied March 24, 2022 (369 Or 505)

STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. CHRISTINA ANN FRAZIER, Defendant-Appellant.

Lincoln County Circuit Court 19CR60083; A173673 498 P3d 882

Sheryl Bachart, Judge.

Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Peter G. Klym, 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 Ortega, Presiding Judge, and Shorr, Judge, and Powers, Judge.

PER CURIAM Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

688 State v. Frazier PER CURIAM Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of metham- phetamine, ORS 475.894(2), and failure to appear on a crim- inal citation, ORS 133.076, reserving her right to challenge on appeal the trial court’s denial of her motion to dismiss.1 She also challenges the imposition of a $100 bench probation fee that was not announced in open court at sentencing. We reject without discussion defendant’s argument concerning the motion to dismiss. See State v. Robison, 233 Or App 90, 227 P3d 169 (2009) (rejecting similar argument). Defendant next argues that the trial court erred in imposing a $100 bench probation fee with respect to her failure-to-appear conviction because the court did not announce that fee on the record in defendant’s presence at sentencing. The state concedes that the court erred in that respect. We agree and accept that concession. See State v. Anotta, 312 Or App 220, 493 P3d 26 (2021) (correcting similar error).

Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

ORS 475.894 has been amended since defendant committed her crime; how- ever, because those amendments do not affect our analysis, we refer to the cur- rent version of the statute in this opinion.

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