State v. Lane

OAR 213-012-0040(2) limits a trial court’s authority to impose consecutive prison terms when there is a single probation violation.

Defendant appealed the lower court's revocation of four probationary terms. Defendant pleaded no contest to encouraging child sexual abuse involving four different victims. In addition to a prison sentence, the court imposed 60 months of probation on each of the four counts. One of the terms of probation prohibited Defendant from consuming alcohol. When it was discovered that Defendant had consumed alcohol, the State initiated revocation proceedings. At the close of those proceedings, the court imposed four prison terms as a sanction for the single violation. The court ordered that some of those terms run consecutively. Defendant appealed. Defendant argued that ORA 213-012-040 prevented the trial court from imposing consecutive prison terms for a single probation violation. In response, the State argued that Article I, section 44(1)(b), of the Oregon Constitution provided the court with authority to impose consecutive sentences because there were four separate victims underlying the crimes. The Court of Appeals agreed with Defendant, holding that OAR 213-012-0040(2) limits the trial courts authority to impose consecutive prison terms for a single probation violation. Remanded for entry of judgment ordering each probationary revocation term to run concurrently; otherwise affirmed.