State v. Russin

“If the sentencing judge accepts the plea agreement, the judge shall impose the stipulated sentence.” ORS § 135.407(4)

The defendant appealed the judgments revoking his probation and challenged the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentences. He argued that the trial court violated ORS § 135.407(4) by imposing a sentence that deviated from the recommendation in his original plea agreements. The Court found that the probation revocation court did not commit plain error by failing to apply ORS § 135.407(4) in sentencing. The Court reasoned that the statute applied to sentencing stipulations made during the plea agreement process, not to sanctions imposed after probation revocation. Furthermore, the Court found that neither § 135.407 nor the Oregon Sentencing Guidelines provided sentencing courts with the discretion to alter sanctions after probation revocation. The Court held that because it is not obvious that § 135.407 applies to future revocation sanctions, the probation revocation court did not plainly err. Affirmed.