Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RAMON RENA HERNANDEZ, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1992-02-12
Citations: 111 Or. App. 400
Docket Number: C9010-35924; CA A69194
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RAMON RENA HERNANDEZ, Appellant.
Judges: Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 111
Pages: 400–401

Head Matter:
Submitted on record and briefs December 19, 1991,
affirmed February 12, 1992
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. RAMON RENA HERNANDEZ, Appellant.
(C9010-35924; CA A69194)
823 P2d 1042
Stephen Shurin, Portland, filed the brief for appellant.
Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, and Timothy A. Sylwester, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Deits and Durham, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant was indicted on two counts of delivery of a controlled substance. ORS 475.992. The first count charged that he committed the crime as part of a drug cultivation, manufacture or delivery scheme or network, but the second count did not. The court overruled defendant's demurrer and alternative motion to strike, which alleged that the scheme or network language was unconstitutionally vague. State v. Moeller, 105 Or App 434, 806 P2d 130, rev dismissed 312 Or 76, 815 P2d 701 (1991). In a trial to the court on stipulated facts, defendant was convicted only on count 2 of the indictment.
Defendant's only assignment of error is based on our decision in Moeller. Because he was convicted only on count 2, which did not allege participation in a scheme or network, the assignment of error is moot.
Affirmed.