2015 ORS 161.326¹
Notice to victim

(1) If the trial court, the Psychiatric Security Review Board or the Oregon Health Authority determines that a victim desires notification as described in ORS 161.325 (Entry of judgment of guilty except for insanity) (2), the agency having jurisdiction over the person shall make a reasonable effort to notify the victim of hearings and orders, conditional release, discharge or escape. Nothing in this subsection authorizes the agency to disseminate information that is otherwise privileged by law.

(2) When the agency conducts a hearing involving a person found guilty except for insanity of a crime for which there is a victim, the agency shall afford the victim an opportunity to be heard, either orally or in writing, at the hearing.

(3)(a) If the agency fails to make a reasonable effort to notify the victim of a hearing under subsection (1) of this section or fails to afford the victim an opportunity to be heard at the hearing under subsection (2) of this section, the victim may request that the agency reconsider the order of the agency.

(b) If the agency determines that the agency failed to make a reasonable effort to notify the victim or failed to afford the victim an opportunity to be heard, except as provided in paragraph (c) of this subsection, the agency shall grant the request for reconsideration. Upon reconsideration, the agency shall consider the statement of the victim and may consider any other information that was not available to the agency at the previous hearing.

(c) The agency may not grant a request for reconsideration that is made:

(A) After the person has been discharged from the jurisdiction of the board and the authority;

(B) After the board or the authority has held a subsequent hearing involving the person; or

(C) If the agency failed to make a reasonable effort to notify the victim of a hearing, more than 30 days after the victim knew or reasonably should have known of the hearing. [1981 c.711 §9; 2010 c.89 §6; 2011 c.708 §6]

Note: 161.326 (Notice to victim) was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of 161.290 (Incapacity due to immaturity) to 161.370 (Determination of fitness) or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

Notes of Decisions

Under former version of these sec­tions, Psychiatric Security Review Board could, at initial disposi­tional hearing, order only commit­ment to mental hospital or condi­tional release, so it had no authority to make independent redetermina­tion of dangerousness of defendant or to order her discharged on basis of such redetermina­tion. Adams v. Psychiatric Security Review Bd., 290 Or 273, 621 P2d 572 (1980)

Law Review Cita­tions

18 WLR 23 (1982)

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 428 (1972); 52 OLR 285-295 (1973)

Chapter 161

Notes of Decisions

A juvenile court adjudica­tion of whether or not a child committed acts which would be a crim­i­nal viola­tion if committed by an adult must necessarily include an adjudica­tion of all af­firm­a­tive de­fenses that would be available to an adult being tried for the same crim­i­nal viola­tion. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. L.J., 26 Or App 461, 552 P2d 1322 (1976)

Law Review Cita­tions

2 EL 237 (1971); 51 OLR 427-637 (1972)

Chapter 161

Criminal Code

(Generally)

Notes of Decisions

Legislature's adop­tion of 1971 Criminal Code did not abolish doctrine of transferred intent. State v. Wesley, 254 Or App 697, 295 P3d 1147 (2013), Sup Ct review denied


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 161—General Provisions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors161.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 161, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano161.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
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.