Summary
upholding convictions that were predicated upon allegations that, by causing a civil complaint to be delivered to the victim, the defendant “recklessly violated the SPO by delivering an object to the victim's home * * * and workplace”
Summary of this case from State v. MeekOpinion
C112214CR A152126.
07-16-2014
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Adam V. BUCHALSKI, Defendant–Appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Matthew J. Lysne, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for petition.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Anna M. Joyce, Solicitor General, and Matthew J. Lysne, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for petition.
Before ARMSTRONG, Presiding Judge, and NAKAMOTO, Judge, and EGAN, Judge.
Opinion PER CURIAM.The state petitions for reconsideration of our decision in State v. Buchalski, 264 Or.App. 142, 331 P.3d 1049. In part, we reversed based on an error in the original judgment, which the state conceded, and remanded for the trial court to merge two guilty verdicts into a single conviction for felony violation of a stalking order. While the appeal was pending, however, the trial court corrected the error in an amended judgment through an interlineation, which reads: “It further appears that Count 4 merges with Count 3 for sentencing* * *[.]” Defendant then filed an amended notice of appeal.
The petition is well-taken, because defendant's assignment of error regarding merger is moot. And, a remand is no longer necessary to correct the error in the original judgment. Accordingly, we now affirm the trial court's amended judgment.
Reconsideration allowed; former disposition withdrawn; affirmed.