Case ID: or-app_178/html/0411-01.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

Submitted on record and briefs November 2,
    reversed and remanded December 19, 2001
    STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. WILLIAM KIRK MCCULLOUGH, Appellant.
    
    960836084; A110263
    37 P3d 186
    David E. Groom, Oregon Public Defender, and Jennelle Hall, Deputy Public Defender, filed the brief for appellant.
    Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Michael D. Reynolds, Solicitor General, and Erika L. Hadlock, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
    Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Linder and Wollheim, Judges.
    PER CURIAM
   PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals from a judgment finding him in violation of and revoking his probation for manufacturing a controlled substance. ORS 475.992(l)(a). Defendant argues, inter alia, that the trial court erred in failing to advise him adequately of the risks and consequences of proceeding pro se at the probation violation hearing. The state confesses error in that regard, and we determine that that concession is well-founded. See State v. Meyrick, 313 Or 125, 133, 831 P2d 666 (1992); State v. Quintero, 162 Or App 674, 675, 986 P2d 665 (1999).

Reversed and remanded.