2007 ORS 135.760¹
Notice requesting early trial on pending charge

(1) Any inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections or of the supervisory authority of a county pursuant to a commitment under ORS 137.124 (Commitment of defendant to Department of Corrections or county) (2) against whom there is pending at the time of commitment or against whom there is filed at any time during imprisonment, in any court of this state, an indictment, information or criminal complaint charging the inmate with the commission of a crime, may give written notice to the district attorney of the county in which the inmate is so charged requesting the district attorney to prosecute and bring the inmate to trial on the charge forthwith.

(2) The notice provided for in subsection (1) of this section shall be signed by the inmate and set forth the place and term of imprisonment. A copy of the notice shall be sent to the court in which the inmate has been charged by indictment, information or complaint. [Formerly 134.510; 1987 c.320 §19; 1995 c.423 §9b]

See also annota­tions under ORS 134.510 in permanent edi­tion.

Notes of Decisions

Letter of inmate to district attorney requesting in­for­ma­­tion concerning status of pending charge of theft was not "notice requesting trial" pursuant to ORS 135.763 (Trial within 90 days of notice unless continuance granted). State v. Williams, 39 Or App 223, 592 P2d 226 (1979)

Where ORS 135.763 (Trial within 90 days of notice unless continuance granted) states that district attorney's duty to act does not arise until he receives notice under this sec­tion, defendant's testimony that he sent notice to district attorney, which trial court believed, was sufficient to activate presump­tion that notice was received and trial court must determine whether state rebutted presump­tion and if so, whether district attorney received it more than 90 days before mo­tion to dismiss. State v. Liefke, 101 Or App 208, 789 P2d 700 (1990)

Penalty-phase pro­ceed­ing is not subject to speedy trial request because no charge is pending at that phase. State v. Pinnell, 319 Or 438, 877 P2d 635 (1994)

Where inmate defendant is aware that indict­ment, in­for­ma­­tion or complaint is pending or has been filed and knowingly fails to file notice requesting trial, defendant is precluded from asserting that sub­se­quent period of delay violates speedy trial right under ORS 135.747 (Effect of delay in bringing defendant to trial). State v. Ayers, 203 Or App 683, 126 P3d 1241 (2006), modified 207 Or App 668, 143 P3d 251 (2006), Sup Ct review denied

Notes of Decisions

Where defendant, who requested speedy trial, made written mo­tion for psychiatric examina­tion and a continuance, state had already set trial within 90-day limit, and examina­tion was delayed because of state hospital backlog which resulted in delay of trial beyond 90-day limit, circumstances were not sufficient to require dismissal of charges. State v. Fannin, 48 Or App 795, 617 P2d 953 (1980)

Where accusatory instru­ment did not exist at time defendant claims to have given written notice requesting speedy trial, notice cannot trigger statutory rights. State v. Easton, 103 Or App 184, 797 P2d 373 (1990)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 135—Arraignment and Pretrial Provisions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­135.­html (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 135, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­135ano.­htm (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
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.