Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LARRY NEIL ENERSON, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1977-12-05
Citations: 31 Or. App. 1023
Docket Number: No. 8722, CA 8589
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LARRY NEIL ENERSON, Appellant.
Judges: Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Lee and Joseph, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 31
Pages: [1023]–[1025]

Head Matter:
Argued November 16,
affirmed December 5, 1977
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. LARRY NEIL ENERSON, Appellant.
(No. 8722, CA 8589)
571 P2d 921
Stephanie A. Smythe, Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With her on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
Scott McAlister, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were James A. Redden, Attorney General, and Al J. Laue, Solicitor General, Salem.
Before Schwab, Chief Judge, and Lee and Joseph, Judges.
PER CURIAM.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Defendant in this case appeals from a 1977 order revoking his probation and ordering him to serve the five-year sentence imposed in 1975 when the trial court had sentenced him to five years in prison, but suspended the execution of sentence and placed him on probation for a like period. The defendant concedes that revocation of probation was warranted, but argues that the five-year sentence was excessive and should be modified. Assuming, arguendo, that we have jurisdiction over the sentence, see State v. Goodin, 1 Or App 559, 465 P2d 487 (1970); State v. Gates, 230 Or 84, 368 P2d 605 (1962), we would not modify the sentence.
Affirmed.