Curry

MEMORANDUM **

1. The Applicability of Former Or. Admin. R. 253 -04-006(3)

The district court erred in finding that Curry’s prior Washington convictions resulted in a probationary disposition and hence not a “sentence” within the meaning of former Oregon Admin. R. 253-04-006(3) (the “single judicial proceeding” rule). There is no reason to treat Curry’s Washington sentence as anything other than that—a sentence. The Washington court’s “minute entry,” judicially noted by the Oregon Court of Appeals, states, “The Court sentences the Def. to a term of total confinement of 90 days on both counts, concurrent” (emphasis added), and contains no reference to probation.

Curry has provided evidence that his Washington convictions satisfy the “single judicial proceeding” rule. The Washington state court’s “minute entry” specifically noted that the two counts were concurrent. Further, both counts were for promoting prostitution—the same crime involving the same elements—at times separated by only three-and-one-half months.

2. Deficient Performance

The failure to raise a meritorious argument at sentencing that might have significantly reduced Curry’s criminal history score qualifies as…