2017 ORS 135.715¹
Effect of nonprejudicial defects in form of accusatory instrument

No accusatory instrument is insufficient, nor can the trial, judgment or other proceedings thereon be affected, by reason of a defect or imperfection in a matter of form which does not tend to the prejudice of the substantial rights of the defendant upon the merits. [Formerly 132.590]

See also annota­tions under ORS 132.590 in permanent edi­tion.

Notes of Decisions

Count of manslaughter in indict­ment charging sec­ond de­gree mur­der was merely unnecessary verbiage and worked no prejudice to defendant’s substantial rights. State v. McCauley, 8 Or App 571, 494 P2d 438 (1972), Sup Ct review denied

Superfluous inclusion of word “amended” in cap­tion of newly issued indict­ment is not prejudicial to defendant because state must elect to proceed either under original indict­ment or under new indict­ment. State v. Mitchell, 9 Or App 17, 495 P2d 1245 (1972); State v. Steward, 9 Or App 35, 496 P2d 40 (1972), Sup Ct review denied

Indict­ment that included unconstitu­tionally vague language is not defect in matter of form. State v. Costello, 115 Or App 202, 837 P2d 552 (1992)

Completed Cita­tions

State v. Zimmerlee, 261 Or 49, 492 P2d 795 (1972)

Law Review Cita­tions

2 EL 230-274 (1971)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 135—Arraignment and Pretrial Provisions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors135.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 135, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano135.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.