Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. EDWARD LEE ROGERS, JR., Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1986-12-31
Citations: 83 Or. App. 270
Docket Number: 80074, 80075A; CA A40797, A40839
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. EDWARD LEE ROGERS, JR., Appellant.
Judges: Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 83
Pages: 270–271

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted December 8,
reversed and remanded for new trial December 31, 1986
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. EDWARD LEE ROGERS, JR., Appellant.
(80074, 80075A; CA A40797, (Control) A40839)
(Cases Consolidated)
730 P2d 43
Laura Graser, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellant.
Charlene Woods, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Warren and Rossman, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
In a trial to the court, defendant was convicted of reckless driving, a Class A misdemeanor, and the lesser included offense of careless driving, a Class B traffic infraction. On appeal, the state concedes that defendant is entitled to a reversal of both convictions.
Regarding the reckless driving conviction, the state acknowledges that no formal, written waiver of defendant's right to a jury trial, signed by him, appears in the trial court file, as required by Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, and ORS 136.001. Regarding the careless driving conviction, the court erred in entering a separate judgment on that charge, because both offenses were committed in the course of a single criminal episode and, thus, the lesser offense merged into the greater offense.
Accordingly, we reverse both convictions and remand to the trial court.
Defendant also invites us to rule on several other assignments of error concerning evidentiary and procedural rulings during the course of the trial. Because those questions are unlikely to arise on retrial, we decline.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.