Case Name: STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Michael Frederick SNYDER, Defendant-Appellant.
Court: Court of Appeals of Oregon
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2018-07-18
Citations: 422 P.3d 435
Docket Number: A162201
Parties: STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Michael Frederick SNYDER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Schuman, Senior Judge.
Reporter: Pacific Reporter 3d
Volume: 422
Pages: 435–435

Head Matter:
STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent,
v.
Michael Frederick SNYDER, Defendant-Appellant.
A162201
Court of Appeals of Oregon.
Submitted June 7, 2018.
July 18, 2018
Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Stephanie J. Hortsch, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the opening brief for appellant. Michael Frederick Snyder filed the supplemental brief pro se.
Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and Leigh A. Salmon, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Schuman, Senior Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
After a bench trial, defendant was convicted of attempt to elude police with a vehicle, interfering with a peace officer, and resisting arrest, and the court imposed a "Mandatory State Amt" of $60 on each conviction as part of defendant's sentence. On appeal, he argues-and the state concedes-that the trial court did not have authority to impose those separate assessments and that they should be reversed. We agree with the parties and accept the state's concession. See State v. Pranzetti , 269 Or. App. 410, 344 P.3d 547 (2015) (reversing portion of judgment imposing $60 "mandatory state amt." where no statute authorized that assessment).
In a supplemental pro se brief, defendant also argues that the trial court erred in finding that he failed to prove, as an affirmative defense, that he was unable to conform his behavior to the requirements of the law because of a mental disorder. We reject that argument without discussion.
Portion of judgment requiring defendant to pay "Mandatory State Amt" on each conviction reversed; otherwise affirmed.