Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

331 Or. App. 633

State v. Jones

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 27, 2024

This page is marked noindex.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2024-03-27

Applies OR 163 § 163.160 · OR 163 § 163.187 · OR 2 § 2.570

Affirmed · Decided 2024-03-27

No. 195                 March 27, 2024                      633

   This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion
    pursuant to ORAP 10.30 and may not be cited
         except as provided in ORAP 10.30(1).

          IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE
                  STATE OF OREGON

                    STATE OF OREGON,
                    Plaintiff-Respondent,
                              v.
                 DANNY EDWARD JONES,
                    Defendant-Appellant.
               Multnomah County Circuit Court
                    22CR25214; A180744

   Eric L. Dahlin, Judge.
   Submitted February 13, 2024.
   Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate
Section, and Laura A. Frikert, Deputy Public Defender,
Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant.
   Jennifer S. Lloyd waived appearance for respondent.
   Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
   EGAN, J.
   Affirmed.
634                                                          State v. Jones

           EGAN, J.
         Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction
for two counts of felony strangulation constituting domestic
violence, ORS 163.187(4). His appointed counsel filed a brief
pursuant to ORAP 5.90 and State v. Balfour, 
311 Or 434
, 
814 P2d 1069
 (1991). The brief does not contain a Section B. See
ORAP 5.90(1)(b). We affirm.1
         Based on incidents in May 2022, defendant was
charged with four counts of felony strangulation constituting domestic violence, ORS 163.187(4) (Counts 1-4) and one
count of felony fourth-degree assault constituting domestic
violence, ORS 163.160(3) (Count 5). After a jury trial, defendant was found guilty of all counts. At sentencing, the trial
court merged Count 2 with Count 1 and imposed a sentence
of 16 months in prison and 24 months of post-prison supervision. The trial court merged Counts 4 and 5 with Count 3
and imposed a stipulated sentence of five years of supervised probation.
         Having reviewed the record, including the trial
court’s pretrial rulings, the testimony of the witnesses, the
jury instructions, the closing arguments, and the arguments
at sentencing, and the brief, we have identified no arguably
meritorious issues.
           Affirmed.




   1
     As authorized by ORS 2.570(2)(b), this matter is determined by a two-judge
panel. See, e.g., State v. Yother, 
310 Or App 563
, 
484 P3d 1098
 (2021) (deciding
matter submitted through Balfour process by two-judge panel); Ballinger v.
Nooth, 
254 Or App 402
, 
295 P3d 115
 (2012), rev den, 
353 Or 747
 (2013) (same).

/331/orapp/633 · .json · Public domain