State v. Gallegos

“Plain error is an error that is (1) one of law; (2) obvious, i.e., not reasonably in dispute; and (3) apparent on the record.” State v. Vanornum, 354 Or 614, 629, 317 P3d 889 (2013).

Defendant challenged the trial court's imposition of over $1 million in restitution after he pled guilty to Manslaughter in the Second Degree, two counts of Assault in the Second Degree, and DUII. On appeal, Defendant argued the trial court erred in finding “good cause” for ordering the restitution after the 90-day deadline under ORS 137.106(1)(a) and it was plain error to not follow the procedure set by statute for crime victims to assert their constitutional rights. In response, the State conceded the trial court’s finding of “good cause” was an error, but argued the Court should still affirm the order because the trial court's failure to follow the statutory procedures was not plain error as ORS 147.504 grants the prosecutor the authority to "assert a victim's constitutional right, particularly those relevant to restitution, outside of the prescribed procedures." “Plain error is an error that is (1) one of law; (2) obvious, i.e., not reasonably in dispute; and (3) apparent on the record.” State v. Vanornum, 354 Or 614, 629, 317 P3d 889 (2013). The Court found that because of the competing arguments, Defendant's argument of the alleged error was not "obvious" or "beyond reasonable dispute." Thus, the trial court did not plainly err. Affirmed.