FRIAR v. STATE OF OREGON, 310 Or. 774 (1990)

801 P.2d 138

SANDRA FRIAR, Petitioner on Review, v. STATE OF OREGON, Respondent on Review.

CC 16-89-03424; CA A61784; SC S37495Oregon Supreme Court.Submitted October 23, 1990
Reversed, and remanded November 26, 1990

On review from the Court of Appeals.[*]

[*] Appeal from Circuit Court for Lane County, Jack Mattison, Judge. 103 Or. App. 130, 796 P.2d 401 (1990).

George W. Kelly, Eugene, filed the petition for petitioner on review.

Thomas H. Denney, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed the response to the petition for respondent on review. With him on the response were Dave Frohnmayer, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General, Salem.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The decision of the Court of Appeals and the judgment of the circuit court are reversed. This case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.

Page 775

[EDITORS’ NOTE: THIS PAGE IS BLANK.]

Page 776

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this post-conviction case, the Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the circuit court without opinion. Friar v. State of Oregon, 103 Or. App. 130, 796 P.2d 401 (1990). After the petition for review was allowed, the state filed a response confessing error, stating,

“Consequently, the state agrees that this case should be remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings, in which further testimony need not be taken, but in which the court should reconsider its decision, in the light of petitioner’s testimony concerning her state of mind at the time of her entry of plea.”

Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals and the judgment of the circuit court are reversed. This case is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.

Page 777

jdjungle