State v. Weber

Summary

The Oregon Court of Appeals held that the defendant failed to preserve his challenge to the exclusion of a defense witness as a sanction for a discovery violation. The court accepted the state's concession that per diem fees could not be imposed for the first time in written judgments and remanded both cases for resentencing, while otherwise affirming the convictions.

Holdings

1. Defendant's claim that the trial court should have imposed a lesser sanction or ordered a continuance was not preserved because defendant did not object to the sanction imposed or request an alternative sanction. The court therefore declined to reach the compulsory-process argument, including plain-error review because defendant did not request it.
2. A trial court errs by imposing per diem fees in a defendant's judgment without first announcing those fees at the sentencing hearing. The judgments were remanded for resentencing because the fees were not announced in open court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court violated defendant's rights to compulsory process under Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution and the Sixth Amendment by excluding a defense witness for an undisputed discovery violation without considering a lesser sanction or continuance.
2. Whether the sentencing judgments could impose per diem fees when the fees had not been announced in open court at the sentencing hearing.

Disposition

remanded