Court Opinion

ID: 9602499
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:56:14.932148+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:04.306728
License: Public Domain

SCHWAB, C. J.,
dissenting in part.
I would not remand for resentencing, because, unlike the majority, I do not interpret the court’s order as revoking probation and then imposing a new sentence of probation, but, rather, as an order continuing the defendant on probation. There was but a single order entered. It reads in pertinent part:
"* * * [T]he court having found that the defendant did unreasonably refuse to submit to a polygraph examination * * * in violation of condition #2 of said probation order, and having allowed said motion to revoke probation; therefore,
"IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the defendant be and she hereby is sentenced to be confined in the Klamath County jail for a period of two days, which has been served; and
"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that probation granted by order of the court dated September 22, 1977, be and it hereby is reinstated, with all conditions to remain in full force and effect.”
Lee, J., joins in this dissent.