Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LEON LAMONT PHILLIPS, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1989-11-08
Citations: 99 Or. App. 375
Docket Number: 87-04-32150, 87-06-33033 & 87-06-33038; CA A48025, A48026 & A48027
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LEON LAMONT PHILLIPS, Appellant.
Judges: Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Newman and Deits, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 99
Pages: 375–376

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted July 21,
affirmed November. 8,1989
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LEON LAMONT PHILLIPS, Appellant.
(87-04-32150, 87-06-33033 & 87-06-33038; CA A48025 (Control), A48026 & A48027)
(Cases Consolidated)
781 P2d 1272
Mary M. Reese, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
Michael C. Livingston, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Newman and Deits, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant pleaded guilty to robbery in the first degree, ORS 164.415, sodomy in the first degree, ORS 163.405, and rape in the first degree. ORS 163.375. The court imposed a 30-year dangerous offender sentence for the robbery conviction. ORS 161.725. Defendant's only contention on appeal is that the court erred in sentencing him as a dangerous offender, because he was not given an opportunity under ORS 161.735(5) to cross-examine the psychologist who submitted a report pursuant to ORS 161.735(3).
Because defendant pleaded guilty, we may only review the sentence for whether it exceeds the maximum allowed by law or is unconstitutionally cruel and unusual. ORS 138.050; State v. Bateman, 95 Or App 456, 771 P2d 314, rev den 308 Or 197 (1989). Defendant's contention does not fall within that scope of review. State v. Loyer, 303 Or 612, 740 P2d 177 (1987).
Affirmed.
The sentences imposed for the other convictions are not at issue in this appeal.