State v. Malouf

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the revocation of John Phillip Malouf’s probation and the resulting sentences. The court held that the probation judgment’s reference to the general conditions in ORS 137.540 provided sufficient notice of the condition requiring Malouf to remain in Oregon unless granted permission to leave. The court also rejected reliance on State v. Priester because this case concerned notice of a probation condition, not the imposition of unannounced sentencing provisions in a judgment.

Holdings

1. A probation judgment that expressly states that the defendant is subject to all general conditions of probation under ORS 137.540 provides sufficient notice of the statutory condition requiring the defendant to remain in Oregon unless written permission to leave is granted.
2. The evidence was sufficient to support a finding that Malouf violated the general probation condition requiring him to remain in Oregon unless he obtained permission to leave.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to establish that Malouf violated the probation condition requiring him to remain in Oregon unless he obtained permission to leave.
2. Whether Malouf had adequate notice of that probation condition when the judgment referenced all general conditions of probation under ORS 137.540.
3. Whether State v. Priester required the probation condition to have been individually stated on the record at sentencing.

Disposition

affirmed