From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Bivens

Oregon Court of Appeals
May 24, 1994
127 Or. App. 83 (Or. Ct. App. 1994)

Opinion

91CR1989FE; CA A75540

Argued and submitted February 25, 1994.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for entry of corrected judgment March 23, 1994. Petition for review denied May 24, 1994 ( 319 Or. 149).

Appeal from Circuit Court, Douglas County, Robert C. Millikan, Judge.

David K. Allen, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender.

Diane S. Lefkow, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. On the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Rossman, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Leeson, Judges.


De MUNIZ, J.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for entry of corrected judgment.


Defendant was convicted of intentional murder with a firearm and burglary in the first degree with a firearm after he killed his estranged wife, ORS 163.115; ORS 164.225; ORS 161.610. Defendant claimed that he acted in self-defense after she stabbed him.

Defendant assigns error to the admission of statements that he made to a detective in a hospital room. He contends that "[t]he type of warnings contemplated by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S Ct 1602, 16 L Ed 2d 694 (1966)," were required because the circumstances were "compelling," and he was in "full custody." He argues that the statements, which were made without warnings, undermined his claim of self-defense. The error, if any, was harmless. The evidence against defendant was overwhelming. Excluding the statements would not likely have changed the outcome of the trial. See State v. Hansen, 304 Or. 169, 180, 743 P.2d 157 (1987).

On the murder conviction, the trial court imposed a life sentence with a 25-year minimum term pursuant to ORS 163.115. Defendant objected, arguing that the sentence should be imposed under the sentencing guidelines. The state concedes that the trial court erred in imposing a life sentence, State v. Morgan, 316 Or. 553, 856 P.2d 612 (1993), but contends that only a corrected judgment, not resentencing is required. We agree that defendant need not be present for the entry of an amended judgment. See State v. Lyons, 124 Or. App. 598, 612n 16, 863 P.2d 1303 (1993). We remand for entry of a corrected judgment deleting the life sentence and imposing post-prison supervision for the remainder of defendant's life under OAR 253-05-004. The 25-year minimum term is lawful.

Convictions affirmed; remanded for entry of corrected judgment.


Summaries of

State v. Bivens

Oregon Court of Appeals
May 24, 1994
127 Or. App. 83 (Or. Ct. App. 1994)
Case details for

State v. Bivens

Case Details

Full title:STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RONALD WAYNE BIVENS, Appellant

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: May 24, 1994

Citations

127 Or. App. 83 (Or. Ct. App. 1994)
871 P.2d 486

Citing Cases

State v. Wright

Accordingly, we remand for entry of a corrected judgment. State v. Bivens, 127 Or. App. 83, 871 P.2d 486…

State v. Stokes

Defendant need not be present for entry of a corrected judgment. State v. Bivens, 127 Or. App. 83, 871 P.2d…