Schlesser v. McLay
Schlesser v. McLay
Opinion
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
Submitted November 9, affirmed December 7, 2022, petition for review denied March 9, 2023 (370 Or 822)
LAWRENCE RAYMOND SCHLESSER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Tom McLAY, Superintendent, Powder River Correctional Institution, Defendant-Respondent.
Umatilla County Circuit Court 19CV49814; A176339
J. Burdette Pratt, Senior Judge.
Jedediah Peterson and O’Connor Weber LLC filed the brief for appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Adam Holbrook, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Tookey, Presiding Judge, and Egan, Judge, and Kamins, Judge.
KAMINS, J.
Affirmed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 323 Or App 104 (2022) 105 KAMINS, J.
Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying post- conviction relief (PCR), arguing that the PCR court erred in concluding that his trial counsel was not constitutionally inadequate or ineffective, because he improperly pressured petitioner to plead guilty to the charged offenses. There is evidence in the record to support the PCR court’s finding that trial counsel did not improperly pressure petitioner to plead guilty, and we are bound by that finding. See Green v. Franke, 357 Or 301, 312, 350 P3d 188 (2015) (“A post- conviction court’s findings of historical fact are binding on this court if there is evidence in the record to support them.”). Accordingly, the PCR court did not err.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.