Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. THOMAS MITCHELL ROSSEN, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1976-02-03
Citations: 24 Or. App. 305
Docket Number: Nos. 74-1748 and 75-263, CA 4977
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. THOMAS MITCHELL ROSSEN, Appellant.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Langtry and Thornton, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 24
Pages: 305–307

Head Matter:
Argued January 19,
affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded February 3, 1976
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. THOMAS MITCHELL ROSSEN, Appellant.
(Nos. 74-1748 and 75-263, CA 4977)
545 P2d 136
J. Marvin Kuhn, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
Donald L. Paillette, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Lee Johnson, Attorney General, and W. Michael Gillette, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Langtry and Thornton, Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant in this case was found guilty of and separately sentenced for burglary in the first degree and theft in the first degree of an item taken in the burglary. On appeal he makes two assignments of error; (1) that separate convictions and sentences for the two offenses cannot lie, and (2) that there was no corroborating evidence of the incriminating testimony of his accomplice.
As to the first assignment, defendant's position is correct. State v. Woolard, 259 Or 232, 484 P2d 314, 485 P2d 1194 (1971); State v. Dechand, 13 Or App 530, 511 P2d 430 (1973).
As to his second assignment, defendant is not correct. State v. Howell, 237 Or 382, 388 P2d 282 (1964); State v. Wederski, 230 Or 57, 368 P2d 393 (1962).
Affirmed in part; reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.