Case ID: or-app_97/html/0682-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      PER CURIAM", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Argued and submitted March 27, reconsideration denied October 27, petition for review denied December 12, 1989
    affirmed July 26,
    (308 Or 608)
    STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. THOMAS ROBERT HUMPHRIES, Appellant.
    
    (85-56791; CA A48959)
    776 P2d 1326
    Arthur P. Stangell, Oregon City, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.
    Vera Langer, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
    Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Newman and Graber, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from what he calls an “order” revoking his probation and execution of a suspended sentence. Defendant pleaded guilty to driving under the influence of intoxicants, ORS 813.010, and the court suspended execution of 87 days of a 90-day sentence and placed him on two-year probation. At a subsequent hearing, where defendant appeared without counsel, the court found that he had violated certain terms of probation, revoked it and ordered his suspended sentence executed. Defendant contends that the court did not adequately assess his desire to proceed without counsel during the probation revocation hearing.

Because defendant pleaded guilty and the court imposed a sentence, our review is controlled by ORS 138.050. State v. Donovan, 307 Or 461, 464, 770 P2d 581 (1989); State v. Bateman, 95 Or App 456, 462, 771 P2d 314 (1989). Defendant’s contention does not challenge the length or constitutionality of the sentence and is therefore beyond our scope of review. ORS 138.050; State v. Bateman, supra.

Affirmed. 
      
       The document appealed from is a handwritten entry on a case summary sheet. There is no other written record of the court’s action.
      
        
      
      We defer to the interpreter’s translation of the trial judge’s handwriting.