Opinion
A179948
07-24-2024
STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. PONY BOY GILBERT, Defendant-Appellant.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Erik Blumenthal, Deputy Public Defender, Offce of Public Defense Services, fled the brief for appellant. Section B of the brief was prepared by appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Leigh A. Salmon, Assistant Attorney General, fled the brief for respondent.
This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).
Submitted June 14, 2024 .
Lane County Circuit Court 21CR39012 Karrie K. McIntyre, Judge.
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Erik Blumenthal, Deputy Public Defender, Offce of Public Defense Services, fled the brief for appellant. Section B of the brief was prepared by appellant.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Leigh A. Salmon, Assistant Attorney General, fled the brief for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
LAGESEN, C. J.
Defendant pleaded guilty to four counts of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427, one count of third-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.415, and three counts of second-degree unlawful sexual penetration, ORS 163.408. The trial court imposed a stipulated sentence of 240 months in prison. Defendant's appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 311 Or. 434, 814 P.2d 1069 (1991). The brief contains a Section B, in which defendant argues, among other things, that his waiver of his right to a speedy trial was not voluntary, that his pleas of guilty were not voluntary, and that the trial court proceedings were not open to the public. The state filed an answering brief responding to those arguments. Reviewing under ORAP 5.90(3) for "arguably meritorious issues," we affirm.
As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge panel. See, e.g., State v. Yother, 310 Or.App. 563, 484 P.3d 1098 (2021) (deciding matter submitted through Balfour process by two-judge panel); Ballinger v. Nooth, 254 Or.App. 402, 295 P.3d 115 (2012), rev den, 353 Or. 747 (2013) (same).
Having reviewed the record, including the trial court file and the transcript of the hearings, and having reviewed the Balfour brief, including defendant's arguments in Section B of the brief and the state's response to those arguments, and taking into account our statutorily circumscribed authority to review, see ORS 138.105, we have identified no arguably meritorious issues.
Affirmed.