Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STANLEY LEE MILLER, Defendant-Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2009-05-27
Citations: 228 Or. App. 742
Docket Number: 01CR0698; A126149
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STANLEY LEE MILLER, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before Landau, Presiding Judge, and Schuman, Judge, and Ortega, Judge.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 228
Pages: 742–743

Head Matter:
On respondent’s petition for reconsideration filed March 19,
reconsideration allowed; former opinion (217 Or App 576, 176 P3d 425 (2008)) modified and adhered to as modified; former disposition withdrawn; affirmed May 27, 2009
STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. STANLEY LEE MILLER, Defendant-Appellant.
Josephine County Circuit Court
01CR0698; A126149
209 P3d 380
John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Erika L. Hadlock, Acting Solicitor General, and Paul L. Smith, Assistant Attorney-in-Charge, Criminal Appeals, for petition.
Before Landau, Presiding Judge, and Schuman, Judge, and Ortega, Judge.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
The state petitions for reconsideration of our decision in this case. In that decision, we concluded that, based on the Oregon Supreme Court's decision in State v. Ice, 343 Or 248, 170 P3d 1049 (2007), rev'd and rent'd, 555 US_, 129 S Ct 711, 172 L Ed 2d 517 (2009), the trial court's imposition of consecutive sentences based on its own findings of fact was plain error. The state now argues that, in light of the United States Supreme Court's reversal of the Oregon court's decision, we should reconsider. We agree. Under the United States Supreme Court's decision, the imposition of consecutive sentences was not error.
Reconsideration allowed; former opinion modified and adhered to as modified; former disposition withdrawn; affirmed.