State v. Garcia
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
No. 313 July 1, 2015 179 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. ISAURO GARCIA, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court C131572CR; A156082 Janelle F. Wipper, Judge. Submitted May 19, 2015. Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, and Lindsey K. Detweiler, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Peenesh H. Shah, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Sercombe, Presiding Judge, and Tookey, Judge, and Edmonds, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay courtappointed attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed. 180 State v. Garcia PER CURIAM Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for second-degree robbery, ORS 164.405(1)(b). He was sentenced to 70 months in prison and ordered to pay, among other amounts, $1,800 in court-appointed attorney fees. We reject without published discussion defendant’s first assignment of error, in which he contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. In his second assignment, defendant contends that the trial court plainly erred in ordering him to pay $1,800 in attorney fees without determining his ability to pay. The state concedes that the trial court plainly erred by imposing attorney fees “on a record that was silent regarding the defendant’s ability to pay them[.]” We agree. See State v. Chavez, 263 Or App 187, 326 P3d 629, rev den, 356 Or 163 (2014) (the imposition of court-appointed attorney fees is plain error where the record is silent as to the defendant’s ability to pay those fees); State v. Coverstone, 260 Or App 714, 320 P3d 670 (2014) (same). Furthermore, for the reasons articulated in Coverstone, we conclude that it is appropriate to exercise our discretion to correct the plain error. 260 Or App at 716-17; see also State v. Fleet, 270 Or App 246, 347 P3d 345 (2015) (exercising discretion to correct plain error under similar circumstances). Accordingly, we accept the state’s concession and reverse the portion of the judgment relating to attorney fees. Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay court-appointed attorney fees reversed; otherwise affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
