why a minimum sentence should not be imposed.” (Emphasis in original.) On January 25, 1983, based on that finding, the court sentenced defendant to a five-year gun minimum sentence pursuant to the version of ORS 161.610 in effect at that time. In that version, the sentencing court was authorized to make the requisite factual finding that a defendant had used or threatened to use a firearm in the commission of a crime when the trier of fact had not necessarily made such a finding and when the defendant had not admitted such use or threatened use. A few months before the court imposed the 1983 gun minimum sentence, the Oregon Supreme Court had held that the portion of ORS 161.610 under which defendant was sentenced was unconstitutional. State v. Wedge, 293 Or 598, 652 P2d 773 (1982) (<HOLDING>). Despite the ruling in Wedge, no one involved
holding that even where evidence regarding the use of a firearm is unrebutted to impose mandatory minimum sentence a jury must make that finding holding that code  182531 criminalizing use or display of a firearm in the commission of a felony included use of an instrument that gives the appearance of being a firearm holding that to apply the firearm enhancement the firearm need only reflect the context of the defendants possession and the defendants ability to use the firearm to promote the controlled substance offense holding that a factual finding of use or threatened use of a firearm by the sentencing court violates a defendants right to a trial by jury under the oregon constitution holding that to enhance a sentence because of the defendants use of a firearm the jury must find the defendant guilty of a crime involving a firearm or otherwise specifically find that a firearm was used