Summary
The Oregon Supreme Court held that the trial court did not err by refusing to resentence the defendant on his noncapital felony convictions because it had followed the court’s limited remand instructions. The court concluded that the defendant’s argument that the appellate court should have ordered resentencing was untimely and procedurally improper, and it affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence of death.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred by refusing to resentence defendant on his noncapital felony convictions when the court was complying with the limited remand ordered in Bowen II.
- Whether defendant was entitled to be personally present at the remand hearing.
Holdings
- The trial court did not err by declining to resentence defendant because it followed the Supreme Court's express remand instructions to enter a corrected judgment.
- Defendant was not entitled to personal presence because his claim depended on his rejected assertion that he was entitled to resentencing.
Key quotations
“A claim of trial court error simply cannot be predicated on the trial court having done what this court ordered it to do.” (474)
“Defendant should have disputed the terms of the remand by timely raising his arguments to this court in Bowen II, rather than asserting on this, his third review before this court, that the trial court erred in following our remand instructions.” (475)
Factual background
In 2002, defendant assaulted his former girlfriend and, in a separate incident the same day, killed a friend and stole from the victim. He pleaded guilty to charges arising from the assault and was convicted by a jury of aggravated murder, intentional murder, theft, and related offenses arising from the killing. The trial court imposed death sentences for the aggravated murder convictions and sentences on the remaining convictions.
Procedural history
Defendant was convicted of aggravated murder, intentional murder, theft, and other offenses, and received two death sentences. In Bowen I, the Oregon Supreme Court directed merger of the murder convictions, enumeration of aggravating factors, and imposition of a single death sentence. In Bowen II, the court rejected defendant's argument that resentencing was required and remanded only for entry of a corrected judgment enumerating the aggravating factors. On the third review, the court held that defendant could not characterize the trial court's adherence to that limited remand as trial-court error because any challenge to the prior appellate disposition should have been raised in Bowen II or on reconsideration.