Grand Jury, Indictments and Other Accusatory Instruments

ORS 132.430
Finding against indictment

  • indorsement “not a true bill”


When a person has been held to answer a criminal charge and the indictment in relation thereto is not found “a true bill,” the indictment must be indorsed “not a true bill,” which indorsement must be signed by the foreman and filed with the clerk of the court, in whose office it shall remain a public record. In the case of an indictment not found “a true bill” against a person who has not been held to answer a criminal charge, the indictment must be destroyed by the grand jury.


When an indictment indorsed “not a true bill” has been filed with the clerk of the court, the effect is to dismiss the charge, and the charge cannot be again submitted to or inquired of by the grand jury unless the court so orders. [Amended by 1973 c.836 §54; 2017 c.650 §6]

Notes of Decisions

When a grand jury indicts for a certain crime based upon a certain set of facts it does not automatically render a "not true bill" on any greater offense under which the defendant might have been indicted. State v. Rankin, 21 Or App 721, 536 P2d 538 (1975)

Where first grand jury returned two rape indictments and did not act on other alleged rapes, and second grand jury indicted defendant on nine other charges, dismissal of indictments was not required by this section because defendant had not been taken into custody or otherwise "held to answer" on any charge prior to second grand jury. State v. Harwood, 45 Or App 931, 609 P2d 1312 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

This section does not control the right of district attorney to file misdemeanor complaint in district court based on same incident as that giving rise to felony charge from which "not true bill" was returned. State v. Gonzales, 56 Or App 17, 641 P2d 42 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

In exercising discretion to allow or deny resubmission of charges to grand jury, trial court must determine, after considering averred facts, whether resubmission is in interest of justice. State v. Stokes, 350 Or 44, 248 P3d 953 (2011)

Chapter 132

Notes of Decisions

A circuit court has no authority to order the wholesale recordation and preservation of grand jury testimony under either statutory or common law. State ex rel Johnson v. Roth, 276 Or 883, 557 P2d 230 (1976)

Where defendant was found in contempt for failure to comply with grand jury subpoena, circuit court had no authority to examine grand jury testimony or discuss its content for the sole purpose of determining the sentence to impose. State v. Applegate, 41 Or App 287, 597 P2d 1290 (1979), Sup Ct review denied


Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021