Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. JAMES MARTIN NELSON, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 2003-11-26
Citations: 191 Or. App. 133
Docket Number: 00CR2711FE; A117845
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. JAMES MARTIN NELSON, Appellant.
Judges: Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Linder and Ortega, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 191
Pages: 133–134

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted October 31,
affirmed November 26, 2003
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. JAMES MARTIN NELSON, Appellant.
00CR2711FE; A117845
80 P3d 543
David C. Degner, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Peter A. Ozanne, Executive Director, Office of Public Defense Services.
Laura S. Anderson, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General.
Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Linder and Ortega, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant appeals from a judgment finding him guilty except for insanity of first-degree burglary and placing him within the jurisdiction of the Psychiatric Security Review Board (PSRB) for a period of time not to exceed 20 years. ORS 161.327. Defendant argues that the trial court was limited to imposing the maximum sentence that he could have received under the sentencing guidelines for the crime of burglary in the first degree. We affirm.
In State v. Brooks, 187 Or App 388, 397, 67 P3d 426, rev den, 335 Or 578 (2003), which presented a different issue but required interpretation of ORS 161.327, we examined the legislative history of the statute and concluded that "the length of PSRB jurisdiction [is] to be measured by the statutory indeterminate maximum sentence rather than by the guidelines presumptive sentence." Our analysis in Brooks is dispositive of defendant's arguments in this case.
Affirmed.