Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

313 Or. App. 388

State v. Marcks

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided July 14, 2021

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2021-07-14

Supplemental judgment reversed · Decided 2021-07-14

                                   388

Submitted June 4; supplemental judgment reversed, remanded for resentencing,
                      otherwise affirmed July 14, 2021


                     STATE OF OREGON,
                      Plaintiff-Respondent,
                                v.
                 KRISTOPHER LEE MARCKS,
                     Defendant-Appellant.
                Washington County Circuit Court
                      19CR78217; A173447
                                
491 P3d 106


   Ricardo J. Menchaca, Judge.
   Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Joel C. Duran, Deputy Public Defender, Office
of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
   Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman,
Solicitor General, and Michael A. Casper, Assistant Attorney
General, filed the brief for respondent.
  Before DeVore, Presiding Judge, and DeHoog, Judge, and
Mooney, Judge.
   PER CURIAM
   Supplemental judgment reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
Cite as 
313 Or App 388
 (2021)                            389

        PER CURIAM
         Defendant, who pleaded guilty to fourth-degree
assault constituting domestic violence, appeals a supplemental judgment imposing restitution. He argues that the
state failed to adduce sufficient evidence that certain hospital expenses incurred by the victim were necessary or reasonable. The state concedes that defendant is correct with
respect to evidence of the reasonableness of the medical
expenses under State v. McClelland, 
278 Or App 138
, 
372 P3d 614
, rev den, 
360 Or 423
 (2016). We accept that concession, and we do not reach defendant’s remaining arguments.
          Defendant also argues that the appropriate remedy
in this circumstance is to vacate the portion of the supplemental judgment awarding the hospital expenses without
remanding. We agree with the state that the appropriate
remedy in this circumstance is to remand for resentencing.
See, e.g., State v. Boza, 
306 Or App 279, 280
, 
473 P3d 1161
(2020) (citing State v. Moreno-Hernandez, 
365 Or 175, 189
,
442 P3d 1092
 (2019)).
        Supplemental judgment reversed; remanded for
resentencing; otherwise affirmed.

/313/orapp/388 · .json · Public domain