Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525 (2026)

Previous prosecution; when not a bar to subsequent prosecution

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      131.525 Previous prosecution; when not a bar to subsequent prosecution. (1) A previous prosecution is not a bar to a subsequent prosecution when the previous prosecution was properly terminated under any of the following circumstances:

      (a) The defendant consents to the termination or waives, by motion, by an appeal upon judgment of conviction, or otherwise, the right to object to termination.

      (b) The trial court finds that a termination, other than by judgment of acquittal, is necessary because:

      (A) It is physically impossible to proceed with the trial in conformity with law; or

      (B) There is a legal defect in the proceeding that would make any judgment entered upon a verdict reversible as a matter of law; or

      (C) Prejudicial conduct, in or outside the courtroom, makes it impossible to proceed with the trial without injustice to either the defendant or the state; or

      (D) The jury is unable to agree upon a verdict; or

      (E) False statements of a juror on voir dire prevent a fair trial.

      (c) When the former prosecution occurred in a court which lacked jurisdiction over the defendant or the offense.

      (d) When the subsequent prosecution was for an offense which was not consummated when the former prosecution began.

      (2) A plea of guilty or resulting judgment is not a bar under ORS 131.515 (2) to a subsequent prosecution under an accusatory instrument which is filed no later than 30 days after entry of the guilty plea. The defendant’s prior plea of guilty or resulting judgment, notwithstanding ORS 135.365, shall be vacated upon motion by the defendant if made within 30 days after defendant’s arraignment for the subsequent prosecution. The provisions of ORS 135.445 apply to such a vacated plea or resulting judgment and any statements made in relation to those proceedings. [1973 c.836 §28; 1983 c.509 §2]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 80 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: State v. O'donnell, 85 P.3d 323 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. O'donnell, 85 P.3d 323 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 46× “ORS 131.525 provides, in part: “(1) A previous prosecution is not a bar to a subsequent prosecution when the previous prosecution was properly terminated under any of the following circumstances: * * * * “(b) The trial court finds that a termination, other than by judgment of…”
State Ex Rel. Turner v. Frankel, 908 P.2d 293 (Or. 1995). · cites it 30× “515(1) provides: “Except as provided in ORS 131.525 and 131.535 * * * [n]o person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Jalo, 557 P.2d 1359 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 14× “Whether any error was committed at defendant's first trial depends upon whether ORS 163.475(3) is constitutional as applied to the facts at bar.”
State v. Clyde, 537 P.3d 170 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 11× “Defendant’s failure to object to the nonunanimous verdicts on any ground, let alone that they implicated ORS 131.525 or double jeopardy, his appeal and characterization of the errors, and his specific request on appeal for a new trial, are “voluntary action[s] intended to forego…”
State v. Toste, 100 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 16× “That statute provides, in part: "Except as provided in ORS 131.525 * * * "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Cole, 595 P.2d 466 (Or. 1979). · cites it 12× “Before considering the requirements of "manifest necessity," as stated in Arizona, for the termination of a criminal trial without a jury verdict, however, we must first consider the requirements for "necessity" as provided by statute in Oregon by ORS 131.525, which was enacted…”
State v. Boots, 848 P.2d 76 (Or. 1993). · cites it 8× “515, provides that, with certain exceptions not relevant to this case in ORS 131.525 and ORS 131.535: "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Moore, 390 P.3d 1010 (Or. 2017). · cites it 4× “Defendant subsequently moved to dismiss the indictment against him citing his former jeopardy and double jeopardy rights under ORS 131.525(1), 2 Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
State v. Farley, 725 P.2d 359 (Or. 1986). · cites it 7× “The Court of Appeals relied on a 1983 amendment to ORS 131.525, which qualified the rule against separate prosecutions stated in ORS 131.”
State v. Hathaway, 728 P.2d 908 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 7× “The parties focus on ORS 131.525(2), which provides: “A plea of guilty or resulting judgment is not a bar under ORS 131.”
State v. Farley, 714 P.2d 1079 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 14× “515 provides, in pertinent part: “Except as provided in ORS 131.525 and 131.535: * “(2) No person shall be separately prosecuted for two or more offenses based upon the same criminal episode, if the several offenses are reasonably known to the appropriate prosecutor at the time…”
State v. Rathbun, 600 P.2d 392 (Or. 1979). · cites it 4× “They provide, respectively, as pertinent to this case: "Except as provided in ORS 131.525 * * * "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
Show all 80 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(1) — 13 cases
State v. Clyde, 537 P.3d 170 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Defendant’s failure to object to the nonunanimous verdicts on any ground, let alone that they implicated ORS 131.525 or double jeopardy, his appeal and characterization of the errors, and his specific request on appeal for a new trial, are “voluntary action[s] intended to forego…”
State v. Moore, 390 P.3d 1010 (Or. 2017). “Defendant subsequently moved to dismiss the indictment against him citing his former jeopardy and double jeopardy rights under ORS 131.525(1), 2 Article I, section 12, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
State v. Nguyen, 771 P.2d 279 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
State v. Wolfs, 826 P.2d 623 (Or. 1992).
State v. Smith, 770 P.2d 950 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(1)(a) — 3 cases
State v. Clyde, 537 P.3d 170 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Defendant’s failure to object to the nonunanimous verdicts on any ground, let alone that they implicated ORS 131.525 or double jeopardy, his appeal and characterization of the errors, and his specific request on appeal for a new trial, are “voluntary action[s] intended to forego…”
State v. Boots, 848 P.2d 76 (Or. 1993). “515, provides that, with certain exceptions not relevant to this case in ORS 131.525 and ORS 131.535: "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Clyde (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(1)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Clyde, 537 P.3d 170 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Defendant’s failure to object to the nonunanimous verdicts on any ground, let alone that they implicated ORS 131.525 or double jeopardy, his appeal and characterization of the errors, and his specific request on appeal for a new trial, are “voluntary action[s] intended to forego…”
State v. Clyde (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(1)(b)(B) — 3 cases
State v. Boots, 848 P.2d 76 (Or. 1993). “515, provides that, with certain exceptions not relevant to this case in ORS 131.525 and ORS 131.535: "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Dykstra, 479 P.3d 294 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Allbritton, 931 P.2d 797 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(1)(b)(C) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Wark v. Freerksen, 733 P.2d 100 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
State v. Blackmon, 555 P.3d 294 (Or. 2024).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(1)(b)(D) — 6 cases
State v. O'donnell, 85 P.3d 323 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “ORS 131.525 provides, in part: “(1) A previous prosecution is not a bar to a subsequent prosecution when the previous prosecution was properly terminated under any of the following circumstances: * * * * “(b) The trial court finds that a termination, other than by judgment of…”
State v. Toste, 100 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “That statute provides, in part: "Except as provided in ORS 131.525 * * * "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Bannister, 846 P.2d 1189 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
State v. Garcia, 704 P.2d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
State v. Blackmon, 555 P.3d 294 (Or. 2024).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(1)(d) — 2 cases
State v. King, 398 P.3d 336 (Or. 2017).
State v. King (Or. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(2) — 15 cases
State v. Hathaway, 728 P.2d 908 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “The parties focus on ORS 131.525(2), which provides: “A plea of guilty or resulting judgment is not a bar under ORS 131.”
State v. Farley, 714 P.2d 1079 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “515 provides, in pertinent part: “Except as provided in ORS 131.525 and 131.535: * “(2) No person shall be separately prosecuted for two or more offenses based upon the same criminal episode, if the several offenses are reasonably known to the appropriate prosecutor at the time…”
State v. Farley, 725 P.2d 359 (Or. 1986). “The Court of Appeals relied on a 1983 amendment to ORS 131.525, which qualified the rule against separate prosecutions stated in ORS 131.”
State v. Ellison, 725 P.2d 363 (Or. 1986).
State v. Warner, 112 P.3d 464 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(2)(a) — 2 cases
State v. Cole, 586 P.2d 386 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
State v. Misten, 554 P.2d 584 (Or. Ct. App. 1976).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(2)(c) — 3 cases
State v. Jalo, 557 P.2d 1359 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). “Whether any error was committed at defendant's first trial depends upon whether ORS 163.475(3) is constitutional as applied to the facts at bar.”
State Ex Rel. Wark v. Freerksen, 733 P.2d 100 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
State v. Williams, 617 P.2d 629 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(2)(d) — 3 cases
State v. Rathbun, 600 P.2d 392 (Or. 1979). “They provide, respectively, as pertinent to this case: "Except as provided in ORS 131.525 * * * "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Blackmon, 555 P.3d 294 (Or. 2024).
State v. Kennedy, 657 P.2d 717 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(2)(e) — 1 case
State v. McFerron, 628 P.2d 440 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(3) — 1 case
State v. Wadekamper, 683 P.2d 168 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(l)(a) — 7 cases
State v. Boots, 848 P.2d 76 (Or. 1993). “515, provides that, with certain exceptions not relevant to this case in ORS 131.525 and ORS 131.535: "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Dinsmore, 116 P.3d 226 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Kimsey, 47 P.3d 916 (Or. Ct. App. 2002).
State v. Wolfs, 826 P.2d 623 (Or. 1992).
State v. Jones, 917 P.2d 515 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(l)(b) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Turner v. Frankel, 908 P.2d 293 (Or. 1995). “515(1) provides: “Except as provided in ORS 131.525 and 131.535 * * * [n]o person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Perks, 847 P.2d 866 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(l)(b)(B) — 2 cases
State v. Boots, 848 P.2d 76 (Or. 1993). “515, provides that, with certain exceptions not relevant to this case in ORS 131.525 and ORS 131.535: "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Allbritton, 931 P.2d 797 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(l)(b)(C) — 2 cases
State Ex Rel. Wark v. Freerksen, 733 P.2d 100 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
State v. Jones, 917 P.2d 515 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.525(l)(b)(D) — 7 cases
State Ex Rel. Turner v. Frankel, 908 P.2d 293 (Or. 1995). “515(1) provides: “Except as provided in ORS 131.525 and 131.535 * * * [n]o person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. Toste, 100 P.3d 738 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “That statute provides, in part: "Except as provided in ORS 131.525 * * * "(1) No person shall be prosecuted twice for the same offense.”
State v. O'donnell, 85 P.3d 323 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “ORS 131.525 provides, in part: “(1) A previous prosecution is not a bar to a subsequent prosecution when the previous prosecution was properly terminated under any of the following circumstances: * * * * “(b) The trial court finds that a termination, other than by judgment of…”
State v. Warner, 112 P.3d 464 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Bannister, 846 P.2d 1189 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
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.