Omnibus hearing
- when held
- subject
- ruling of court
- counsel required
Source:
Section 135.037 — Omnibus hearing; when held; subject; ruling of court; counsel required, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors135.html.
Notes of Decisions
Where oral and physical evidence were intermixed at trial and the oral evidence was held inadmissible at trial, the defendant’s failure to move to suppress the physical evidence based on the inadmissibility of the oral evidence before the trial precluded such a motion during trial. State v. Graber, 21 Or App 765, 537 P2d 117 (1975), Sup Ct review denied
The mandatory language of this section does not require hearing and ruling prior to trial on every foreseeable issue concerning admissibility of evidence. State v. Cheshier, 41 Or App 141, 597 P2d 839 (1979), Sup Ct review denied
A purpose of this section is to preserve state’s right of appeal of rulings which are appealable under [former] ORS 138.060, but it is not intended to expand scope of state’s right of appeal. State v. Caruso, 289 Or 315, 613 P2d 752 (1980)
Court may question witness before jury is sworn to determine whether witness will testify at trial, but under ORCP 58B court had no authority to order witness to testify on substance of case until witness is called during normal course of trial. State v. Nefstad, 99 Or App 12, 781 P2d 358 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
Motion to limit evidence may be considered in pretrial omnibus hearing under this section. State v. Troen, 100 Or App 442, 786 P2d 751 (1990), Sup Ct review denied
Defendant was not required to present evidence or argument on issue not raised in state’s initial request for omnibus hearing. State v. Gable, 127 Or App 320, 873 P2d 351 (1994), Sup Ct review denied
Where aggravated murder case is remanded for new penalty-phase proceeding, proceeding is treated as separate trial for purpose of allowing omnibus hearing prior to trial. State ex rel Carlile v. Frost, 326 Or 607, 956 P2d 202 (1998)
Up to date