Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

339 Or. App. 460

State v. Bartley

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided April 2, 2025

This page is marked noindex.

Court of Appeals of Oregon · decided 2025-04-02

Applies OR 161 § 161.405 · OR 163 § 163.175 · OR 163 § 163.195 · OR 2 § 2.570

Affirmed · Decided 2025-04-02

460                    April 2, 2025               No. 289

  This is a nonprecedential memorandum opinion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.
              JOHN ANTHONY BARTLEY,
                 Defendant-Appellant.
              Douglas County Circuit Court
                 23CR44027; A184434

  George William Ambrosini, Judge.
  Submitted February 14, 2025.
  Frances J. Gray filed the brief for appellant.
  Jennifer S. Lloyd, Assistant Attorney General, waived
appearance for respondent.
  Before Lagesen, Chief Judge, and Egan, Judge.
  EGAN, J.
  Affirmed.
Nonprecedential Memo Op: 
339 Or App 460
 (2025)                            461

           EGAN, J.
          After a bench trial, defendant was convicted of
second-degree assault, ORS 163.175; attempted second-degree assault, ORS 161.405; ORS 163.175; and two counts
of recklessly endangering another person, ORS 163.195. The
trial court sentenced defendant to 57 months in prison and
36 months of post-prison supervision. Defendant’s driver’s
license was suspended for eight years, and defendant was
ordered to pay restitution to the victim. 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
         Having reviewed the record, including the trial
court file, the transcript of the hearings and the bench trial,
and the Balfour 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).

/339/orapp/460 · .json · Public domain