Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

228 Or. App. 361

208 P.3d 980

State v. Mills

STATE of Oregon, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Eric Christopher MILLS, aka Erick Christopher Mills, Defendant-Appellant.

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 13, 2009

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2009-05-13

Relies on Oregon v. Ice · State v. Ice · 215 Or. App. 112 - State v. Montgomery

Decided 2009-05-13

040431756; A127453.

¶1Court of Appeals of Oregon.

On Respondent's Petition for Reconsideration February 23, 2009.
Decided May 13, 2009.

¶2John R. Kroger, Attorney General, Erika L. Hadlock, Acting Solicitor General, and Paul L. Smith, Assistant Attorney-in-Charge, Criminal Appeals, for petition.

¶3Before BREWER, Chief Judge, and LANDAU, Judge, and ORTEGA, Judge.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5The state petitions for reconsideration. In State v. Mills,219 Or.App. 225, 182 P.3d 889 (2008), we granted defendant's petition for reconsideration, vacated our prior decision, State v. Mills,215 Or.App. 112, 168 P.3d 338 (2007), and remanded for resentencing in light of State v. Ice,343 Or. 248, 170 P.3d 1049 (2007). Ice, however, subsequently was reversed. Oregon v. Ice,555 U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 711, 172 L.Ed.2d 517 (2009). The state now argues that, in light of Ice, our remand for resentencing was erroneous. The state is correct that the case is controlled by the United States Supreme Court's decision in Ice. Accordingly, on reconsideration, we withdraw our former opinion and affirm.

¶6Reconsideration allowed; former opinion withdrawn; affirmed.

/228/orapp/361 · .json · Public domain