131.015
Application to prior and subsequent actions.
(1) The provisions of
chapter 836, Oregon Laws 1973, apply to:
(a) All criminal
actions and proceedings commenced upon or after January 1, 1974, and all
appeals and other post-judgment proceedings relating or attaching thereto; and
(b) All matters
of criminal procedure prescribed in chapter 836, Oregon Laws 1973, which do not
constitute a part of any particular action or case, occurring upon or after
January 1, 1974.
(2) The
provisions of chapter 836, Oregon Laws 1973, do not impair or render
ineffectual any proceedings or procedural matters which occurred before January
1, 1974. [1973 c.836 §2]
Note: See note under 131.005.
131.020 [Repealed by 1973 c.836 §358]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases, 1989–2016 · leading case:
State v. Meyers, 958 P.2d 187 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
State v. Meyers, 958 P.2d 187 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 2× “*559 First, it is clear from ORS 131.015 that, when framing a savings clause in the criminal law context, the legislature knows how to make a new law applicable to both criminal actions and proceedings, that is, by simply saying just that.”
State v. McCright, 386 P.3d 141 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 2× “13 *704 The same is true here—with an additional, exacerbating twist: Defendant not only fully litigated venue by way of cross-examination of the state’s witnesses, his own testimony, and closing argument, but he also made admissions during his testimony substantiating venue…”
State v. Holdner, 772 P.2d 1382 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
“In addition, ORS 131.015 states that the provisions of the 1973 Act apply to “all criminal actions and proceedings commenced on or after January 1, 1974 * * (Emphasis supplied.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.015(12) — 1 case
State v. McCright, 386 P.3d 141 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“13 *704 The same is true here—with an additional, exacerbating twist: Defendant not only fully litigated venue by way of cross-examination of the state’s witnesses, his own testimony, and closing argument, but he also made admissions during his testimony substantiating venue…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.015(l)(a) — 1 case
State v. Meyers, 958 P.2d 187 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“*559 First, it is clear from ORS 131.015 that, when framing a savings clause in the criminal law context, the legislature knows how to make a new law applicable to both criminal actions and proceedings, that is, by simply saying just that.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.