Case Name: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. JEFFERY ALLEN MEYERS, Appellant
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1987-06-17
Citations: 86 Or. App. 1
Docket Number: 86-04-3870-C, 86-04-3871-C; CA A41275, A41276
Parties: STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. JEFFERY ALLEN MEYERS, Appellant.
Judges: Before Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Newman and Deits, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 86
Pages: 1–2

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted April 29,
conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle reversed; otherwise affirmed June 17, 1987
STATE OF OREGON, Respondent, v. JEFFERY ALLEN MEYERS, Appellant.
(86-04-3870-C, 86-04-3871-C; CA A41275, A41276)
(Cases consolidated)
738 P2d 211
J. Marvin Kuhn, Chief Deputy Public Defender, Salem, argued the cause for appellant. With him on the brief was Gary D. Babcock, Public Defender, Salem.
Terry Ann Leggert, 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 Richardson, Presiding Judge, and Newman and Deits, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. The robbery indictment charged that defendant took the victim's vehicle as part of the robbery. The court imposed separate sentences on each charge to run concurrently.
Defendant contends and the state agrees that the elements of the unauthorized use of a motor vehicle charge were part of the robbery charge and that the court should have entered only a conviction for robbery and a sentence on that charge. We agree.
Defendant was ordered to pay $3,500 to the victim as restitution. He contends that the court did not conduct an adequate hearing to determine the amounts of damage suffered by the victim. There was a hearing conducted after defendant objected to the amounts. He also agreed, through counsel, with the procedure utilized by the court to verify the victim's losses. There was no error in the judgment for restitution.
Conviction for unauthorized use of a motor vehicle reversed; otherwise affirmed.