Criteria to be considered in plea discussions and plea agreements
Source:
Section 135.415 — Criteria to be considered in plea discussions and plea agreements, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors135.html.
Notes of Decisions
Where district attorney adhered to standards expressed in this section, Freeland requirement that district attorney adhere “to sufficiently consistent standards to represent coherent, systematic policy” was met and defendant has not established predicate for alleged constitutional violation. State v. Buchholz, 309 Or 442, 788 P2d 998 (1990)
Where prosecutor improperly allowed victim’s parents’ wishes to control his decision not to enter into plea agreement and record did not reveal what prosecutor independently would have decided, case remanded to trial court for evidentiary hearing to determine how prosecutor would have exercised his judgment and discretion on basis of proper criteria and facts that existed at time he declined to enter into plea agreement. State v. McDonnell, 310 Or 98, 794 P2d 780 (1990); 313 Or 478, 837 P2d 941 (1992)
Record reflected ample justification for prosecutor to treat defendant differently than other individual with whom prosecutor negotiated plea agreement, considering defendant’s role in commission of murders. State v. Guzek, 310 Or 299, 797 P2d 1031 (1990)
Up to date