Arraignment and Pretrial Provisions

ORS 135.857
Disclosure to victim

  • conditions


(1)

In any criminal prosecution arising from an automobile collision in which the defendant is alleged to have been under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the district attorney prosecuting the action shall make available, upon request, to the victim or victims and to their attorney, or to the survivors of the victim or victims and to their attorney, all reports and information disclosed to the defendant pursuant to ORS 135.805 (Applicability) to 135.873 (Protective orders). The reports and information shall be made available at the same time as it is disclosed to the defendant or as soon thereafter as may be practicable after a request is received. The district attorney may impose such conditions as may be reasonable and necessary to prevent the release of the reports and information from interfering with the trial of the defendant. The district attorney may apply to the court for an order requiring any person receiving such reports and information to comply with the conditions of release.

(2)

For the purpose of this section:

(a)

“District attorney” has that meaning given in ORS 131.005 (General definitions).

(b)

“Drug” has that meaning given in ORS 475.005 (Definitions for ORS 475.005 to 475.285 and 475.752 to 475.980). [1991 c.229 §2]
§§ 135.805 to 135.873

See also annotations under ORS 133.755 in permanent edition.

Notes of Decisions

Copy of letter sent to district court and also to district attorney's office, entering not guilty plea and stating "by copy of this letter I am demanding reciprocal discovery from the District Attorney's office," was insufficient to make formal demand for disclosure of classes of information available under these sections. State v. Sheppard, 32 Or App 345, 573 P2d 1276 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Specifications, operating instructions and repair and maintenance records for radar device with which arresting officer measured defendant's speed were not discoverable under these sections. State v. Spada, 33 Or App 257, 576 P2d 33 (1978), aff'd286 Or 305, 594 P2d 815 (1979)

These sections afford defendant opportunity to obtain specific and detailed information about state's theory of case and evidence it intends to produce at trial, and purposes that indictments and complaints are designed to serve in criminal cases are now served as well or better by discovery. State v. Strandquist, 57 Or App 404, 644 P2d 658 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

Nothing in discovery statutes prevents state from initiating grand jury investigation of possible criminal activities by potential defense witnesses. State v. Huffman, 65 Or App 594, 672 P2d 1351 (1983)

Where defendant appeals conviction and trial court precluded defense witness because of alleged discovery violation and state being prejudiced, trial court obligated to explore other alternatives to remedy prejudice before precluding witness from testifying. State v. Gill, 96 Or App 358, 772 P2d 957 (1989)

Law Review Citations

51 OLR 354-369 (1972); 10 WLJ 145-166 (1974); 18 WLR 279 (1982)


Source

Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021