Authority of court to impose sentence outside guidelines
Source:
Section 137.671 — Authority of court to impose sentence outside guidelines, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors137.html.
Notes of Decisions
Where court clearly stated it was not imposing sentence departure because of defendant’s status as illegal alien but because of his absolute disregard for any laws, and imposition of presumptive probationary sentence would not have accomplished goals of guidelines, departure sentence was proper. State v. Morales-Aguilar, 121 Or App 456, 855 P2d 646 (1993)
Upward departure sentences that require judicial findings of fact and are not based on facts found by jury violate Sixth Amendment to United States Constitution. State v. Sawatzky, 195 Or App 159, 96 P3d 1288 (2004)
Facts establishing substantial and compelling reasons for exceeding presumptive sentence under sentencing guidelines, other than fact of prior conviction, must be determined by jury or admitted by defendant. State v. Dilts, 337 Or 645, 103 P3d 95 (2004)
Trial court is authorized to have jury determine whether state has proven existence of sentence enhancing factors, but trial court determines whether proven sentence enhancing factors justify imposition of departure sentence. State v. Upton, 339 Or 673, 125 P3d 713 (2005)
Defendant may elect to have judge, rather than jury, determine existence of aggravating facts for purposes of sentence enhancement. State v. Gornick, 340 Or 160, 130 P3d 780 (2006)
Lack of evidence that defendant was aware of prior filing of criminal complaint did not allow court to infer that defendant had committed current crime with knowledge that defendant had pending criminal matter, so upward durational departure sentence was not justifiable. State v. Eggleston, 302 Or App 797, 462 P3d 314, rev’d in part on other grounds 366 Or 491, 464 P3d 427 (2020), Sup Ct review allowed
Up to date