No. 932 December 26, 2024 87 This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JESSICA BRYCE MOORE, aka Jessica Rae Moore, Defendant-Appellant.

Lane County Circuit Court 23CR00711, 23CN01546, 23CR14048; A182091 (Control), A182092, A182093 R. Curtis Conover, Judge.

Submitted November 8, 2024.

Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Erik Blumenthal, Deputy Public Defender, Oregon Public Defense Commission, filed the brief for appellant.

Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, waived appearance for respondent.

Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.

LAGESEN, C. J.

Affirmed.

88 State v. Moore LAGESEN, C. J.

In this consolidated appeal, defendant appeals three judgments of conviction. Her appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 311 Or 434, 814 P2d 1069 (1991). The brief does not contain a Section B. See ORAP 5.90(1)(b). We affirm.1 In Case No. 23CR00711, defendant pleaded guilty to first-degree child neglect (Count 1); delivery of metham- phetamine (Count 2); manufacture or delivery of a Schedule II controlled substance (Count 3); and attempted manufac- ture of methamphetamine (Count 4). She was sentenced to months in prison (Count 1); 19 months in prison (Count 2); six months in jail (Count 3); and six months in jail (Count 4). The parties stipulated to the sentences on Counts 3 and 4. The sentences are concurrent to the sentences in Case No. 23CR14048.

In Case No. 23CR14048, defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of manufacture or delivery of a Schedule II controlled substance (Counts 1 and 2); and one count of unlawful possession of a Schedule II controlled substance (Count 3). She was sentenced to nine months in jail (Count 1); nine months in jail (Count 2); and 34 months in prison (Count 3). The parties stipulated to the sentence on Count 3.

In Case No. 23CN01546, based on defendant’s admission, the trial court found her in contempt of court.

The trial court imposed a sanction of time in jail, with credit for time served and concurrent to the sentences in Case Nos. 23CR00711 and 23CR14048.

Having reviewed the record, including the trial court files in the three cases, the transcripts of the hearings, and the Balfour brief, and taking into account our statuto- rily circumscribed authority to review, see ORS 138.105, we have identified no arguably meritorious issues.

Affirmed.

As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel. See, e.g., State v. Yother, 310 Or App 563, 484 P3d 1098 (2021) (deciding matter submitted through Balfour process by two-judge panel); Ballinger v. Nooth, 254 Or App 402, 295 P3d 115 (2012), rev den, 353 Or 747 (2013) (same).