Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. DANIEL MARK TOVREA, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1985-07-10
Citations: 74 Or. App. 356
Docket Number: 35032, 35395, 35396, 35397, 35654; CA A32064 (Control), A32066, A32067, A32068, A32069
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. DANIEL MARK TOVREA, Appellant.
Judges: Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 74
Pages: 356–357

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted June 21,
first-degree convictions vacated, remanded for entry of second-degree convictions July 10, 1985
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. DANIEL MARK TOVREA, Appellant.
(35032, 35395, 35396, 35397, 35654; CA A32064 (Control), A32066, A32067, A32068, A32069)
702 P2d 1150
Stephen J. Williams, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and James E. Mountain, Jr., Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Gillette, Presiding Judge, and Van Hoomissen and Young, Judges.
PER CURIAM
The court on its own motion consolidated these cases.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
In these five criminal cases, which we hereby consolidate on our own motion, defendant challenges his convictions, in each case, for burglary in the first degree. He contends that the enhancement of his offenses to burglary in the first degree from burglary in the second degree because he was armed in each case with an alleged "burglar's tool" was impermissible because the burglar's tool statute, ORS 164.235, is unconstitutionally vague. Defendant is correct. State v. Graves, 299 Or 189, 700 P2d 244 (1985); State v. Sells, 299 Or 198, 702 P2d 68 (1985).
Judgments of conviction for burglary in the first degree vacated; remanded for entry of judgments and sentences for burglary in the second degree.
Defendant's separate assignments of error in cases A32066 and A32068 are not well taken.