Skip to main content

State v. Harrington

Citations

  • 211 P.3d 972
  • 229 Or. App. 473
  • 2009 Ore. App. LEXIS 968

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • reviewing as plain error imposition of restitution unsupported by evidence of the amount of the victim’s loss
  • exercising discretion to invalidate an award of restitution where the state failed to establish the value of the victim’s loss
  • exercising discretion to review the error because the record contained no evidence to support the imposition of restitution in the amount that the state requested
  • reversing as plain error the imposition of $5,835.40 in restitution for a robbery case, when the only evidence presented by the state was that specific items had been stolen from the victim, but nothing about the value of those items
  • significant restitution award not supported by any evidence in the record was plain error, which the court exercised its discretion to correct
  • imposition of compensatory fine without evidentiary basis is plain error that court will exercise its discretion to correct

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Landau, Ortega, Carson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.