Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. GARY JAMES FRAZEY, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2005-12-07
Citations: 203 Or. App. 122
Docket Number: 0307-33540; A124084
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. GARY JAMES FRAZEY, Appellant.
Judges: Before Linder, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Wollheim, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 203
Pages: 122–123

Head Matter:
Submitted on record and briefs August 12,
sentences vacated; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed December 7, 2005
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. GARY JAMES FRAZEY, Appellant.
0307-33540; A124084
125 P3d 31
James N. Varner filed the brief for appellant.
Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Erika L. Hadlock, Assistant Solicitor General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Linder, Presiding Judge, and Edmonds and Wollheim, Judges.
PER CURIAM
Edmonds, J., vice Richardson, S. J.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant was convicted of robbery in the first degree, ORS 164.415, assault in the second degree, ORS 163.175, animal abuse in the second degree, ORS 167.315, and tampering with a witness, ORS 162.285. On appeal, defendant challenges the trial court's imposition of an upward departure sentence on his conviction for robbery in the first degree. He argues that the court's upward departure was erroneous under Blakely v. Washington, 542 US 296, 124 S Ct 2531, 159 L Ed 2d 403 (2004), because it was based on facts that were not admitted by defendant nor found by a jury. Although defendant did not advance such a challenge below, he argues that the sentence should be reviewed as plain error. Under our decision in State v. Perez, 196 Or App 364, 102 P3d 705 (2004), rev allowed, 338 Or 488 (2005), the trial court's upward departure — based on its findings that defendant was "on supervision at time of offense" and that "repeated periods of incarceration have failed to deter defendant" — is plainly erroneous. For the reason set forth in Perez, we exercise our discretion to correct the error. See also State v. Allen, 198 Or App 392, 108 P3d 651, adh'd to on recons, 202 Or App 565, 123 P3d 331 (2005).
Sentences vacated; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.