State v. Aguilera

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 03-08-2023
  • Case #: A176065
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Tookey, P.J. for the Court; Egan, J.; and Kamins, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

"ORS 135.703 is intended to allow civil compromise for Class C felonies that are capable of being punished as misdemeanors by operation of ORS 161.705."

The State appealed the dismissal of defendant's charges under ORS 135.703, which allows for a Class C felony to be reduced to a Class A misdemeanor. The State argued that the defendant's charges required a sentencing of 18 months, ORS 135.703 does not apply because the charges are not "punishable as a misdemeanor." The trial court responded that the language of the txt supports that ORS 135.703 applies to a crime that could be punishable as a misdemeanor. In, State v. Dumond,  the court identified that the statute was intended to allow for "civil compromise" for Class C felonies "capable" of being punished as misdemeanors. State v. Dumond, ORS 1270 Or 854, 857 (1974). The court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing the charges pursuant to a civil compromise. The court found that the txt, context, and legislative history of ORS 135.703 Class C felonies are reducable to a misdemeanor, unless explicitly listed in ORS 161.705. The court reasoned that because the indictment charged the defendant with crimes that are Class C felonies that could be punished as a misdemeanor. The court reasoned that the state's arguments conflate different applications of civil compromise. Additionally, crimes for which civil compromise is unavailable, are explicitly listed in the statute. AFFIRMED.

Advanced Search

Back to Top