State v. Thomas

                                633

      Submitted February 7, reversed and remanded March 4, 2020


                  STATE OF OREGON,
                   Plaintiff-Respondent,
                             v.
                  ASHLEY T. THOMAS,
                   Defendant-Appellant.
               Douglas County Circuit Court
                  18VI208667; A170251
                            

  Jason R. Thomas, Judge pro tempore.
  Ashley Thomas filed the brief pro se.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Christopher A. Perdue, Assistant
Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and
Mooney, Judge.
  PER CURIAM
  Reversed and remanded.
634                                            State v. Thomas

         PER CURIAM
          Defendant appeals a judgment convicting her of
speeding. ORS 811.111. Defendant was issued a citation on
December 6, 2018. On January 8, 2019, she filed a plea of
not guilty and requested a trial. On January 9, 2019, the
court sent out a notice of trial scheduled for February 4,
2019. However, in preparing the notice, the court clerk mistranscribed defendant’s address. The notice was returned to
the court on January 15, 2019, indicating “return to sender,
insufficient address.” On February 4, 2019, the court held
a trial in defendant’s absence, convicted her of the offense,
issued notice of suspension her driver’s license, and imposed
a fine of $1,150.
         On appeal, defendant argues that the trial court
erred in holding a trial and convicting her in her absence
because she was not given adequate notice of the trial. The
state concedes the error, noting that, under ORS 153.073,
unless notice is waived by the defendant, the court is
required to provide the defendant with “notice of the date,
time and place at least five days before the date set for trial,”
and, in cases involving traffic violations, the notice must
contain a warning that, if the defendant fails to appear, the
defendant’s driving privileges are subject to suspension. We
agree and accept the state’s concession. See generally State
v. Worthington, 

, 

 (2013) (reversing and remanding in a traffic violation case where there
was no evidence that the defendant received notice at least
five days before the date set for trial).
         Reversed and remanded.