Time of disclosure
Source:
Section 135.845 — Time of disclosure, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors135.html.
Notes of Decisions
The duty to disclose may arise prior to the filing of an indictment. State v. Johnson, 26 Or App 651, 554 P2d 624 (1976)
Where defendant did not request discovery in accordance with this section he could not claim prejudice as result of state’s alleged failure to comply with discovery pursuant to ORS 135.815. State v. Dixon, 31 Or App 1027, 571 P2d 922 (1977), Sup Ct review denied
Notwithstanding that defendant sought discovery of material from district attorney more than five weeks prior to trial, materials delivered two days before trial were furnished as “soon as practicable” where delay was not caused by district attorney’s office. State v. Carsner, 31 Or App 1115, 572 P2d 339 (1977)
Where, without notifying defense as required by this section, prosecution used sexual abuse victim’s dress to impeach defendant, new trial was required. State v. Dickerson, 36 Or App 479, 584 P2d 787 (1978)
Since this section does not require defendant to request discovery material at any particular time when prosecution fails to comply with its discovery obligations and where defendant’s use of evidence required no examination prior to trial, discovery motion made during trial was timely. State v. Clements, 52 Or App 309, 628 P2d 433 (1981)
It was proper for trial court to order usable copy of videotape be provided defendant, at her expense, where state previously had allowed inspection of videotape in police officer’s presence. State v. Kull, 298 Or 38, 688 P2d 1327 (1984)
Absent showing that party intended to avoid compliance, no discovery violation occurs until party finds additional information or material and fails to promptly notify other party. State v. Dillard, 100 Or App 645, 787 P2d 1307 (1990); State v. Beaty, 127 Or App 448, 873 P2d 385 (1994), Sup Ct review denied
Up to date