- Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
- Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
- Date Filed: 06-09-2021
- Case #: A172058
- Judge(s)/Court Below: Shorr, J. for the Court; Ortega, P.J.; & Powers, J.
- Full Text Opinion
Defendant appealed the judgement of his conviction for driving under the influence of intoxicants. Defendant assigned error to the trial court’s imposition of a conviction fee that was not expressly stated during sentencing. Defendant argued that because the fee was not expressly stated during the sentencing, he did not have a chance to contest the fee. The State responded by claiming that the fee was incorporated in a reference to the “drug package” recommendation to the court. “It is error for a trial court to impose a fine or fee as part of a sentence on a misdemeanor conviction in a judgment when that fine or fee was not previously announced in open court at the defendant’s sentencing hearing.” State v. Tison, 292 Or App 369, 374 (2018). The Court disagreed with the State’s contention because the phrase “drug package” is not a term of art and can have various meanings. The Court also reasoned that the fee was not expressly referenced in the “drug package” offered to the court, thus it could not be incorporated in the State’s recommendation. Judgment of conviction relating to the fee is vacated and remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.