Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. HERBERT HENRY BLUME, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1978-09-06
Citations: 36 Or. App. 161
Docket Number: No. C 75-06-1821 Cr, CA 9861
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. HERBERT HENRY BLUME, Appellant.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Thornton and Tanzer, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 36
Pages: 161–163

Head Matter:
Argued August 22,
reversed and remanded for resentencing September 6, 1978
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. HERBERT HENRY BLUME, Appellant.
(No. C 75-06-1821 Cr, CA 9861)
583 P2d 34
James E. Mountain, Jr., Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
Jan P. Londahl, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were James A. Redden, Attorney General, and Walter L. Barrie, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Thornton and Tanzer, Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Defendant on appeal contends that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking defendant's probation and, secondly, that the trial court erred in failing to require the Corrections Division to furnish it with a presentence report prior to imposing sentence upon revocation.
As for the first assignment, suffice it to say that the revocation of probation was amply supported by the evidence presented. As to the second assignment, the state "concedes that the circuit court erred in failing to require the Corrections Division to furnish a copy of a presentence report prior to imposing sentence upon revocation. ORS 144.790(1); State v. Gale[35 Or App 3, 580 P2d 1036 (1978)]."
Reversed and remanded for resentencing.