Full text
State v. Vanhorn
— 224 —
Submitted March 4; portion of judgment imposing special condition of probation reversed, remanded for resentencing, otherwise affirmed March 24, 2021
STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. JASON ALEXANDER VANHORN, Defendant-Appellant. Washington County Circuit Court 19CR18347; A171958 483 P3d 1257
Theodore E. Sims, Judge. Ernest G. Lannet, Chief Defender, Criminal Appellate Section, and Brett J. Allin, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the brief for appellant. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General, Benjamin Gutman, Solicitor General, and E. Nani Apo, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent. Before Lagesen, Presiding Judge, and James, Judge, and Kamins, Judge. PER CURIAM Portion of judgment imposing special condition of pro- bation reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
Cite as 310 Or App 224 (2021) 225
PER CURIAM Defendant was convicted in a bench trial of harass- ment, ORS 166.065, and second-degree criminal mischief, ORS 164.354. On appeal, he argues that the state adduced insufficient proof of his intent to commit harassment. We reject that argument without written discussion. He also argues that the court erred in including in the written judg- ment a special condition of probation that he “[s]ubmit to search of person, residence, vehicle and property includ- ing consent to search computer and telephonic devices.” A general condition of probation requires a probationer to consent to searches “if the supervising officer has reason- able grounds to believe that evidence of a violation will be found.” ORS 137.540(1)(i). As this court concluded in State v. Bowden, 292 Or App 815, 818, 425 P3d 475 (2018), a court may not impose a special condition of probation that “over- rides a general condition and for which the limitations of a general condition need not be followed.” (Emphasis in orig- inal.) The state concedes that this probation condition was impermissible. We agree and accept the state’s concession. We note that we reached the same conclusion, with respect to a similar Washington County condition of probation, in State v. Nelson, 310 Or App 219, 483 P3d 1261 (2021). Portion of judgment imposing special condition of probation reversed; remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.