131A.265
Stays. (1) The
court may stay a forfeiture action upon motion of a party and good cause shown.
Good cause may include a reasonable fear on the part of a claimant that the
claimant could be prosecuted for conduct arising out of the same factual
situation that gave rise to the seizure of property. Good cause for a motion
made by forfeiture counsel may include the need for additional time to commence
or complete a criminal proceeding related to the forfeiture action.
(2) The court may
stay a forfeiture action upon the filing of criminal charges that are related
to the prohibited conduct that is the basis for the action. The stay may be
granted upon the motion of forfeiture counsel, the motion of the district
attorney in the related criminal proceeding, or the motion of the defendant in
the related criminal proceeding. A stay granted under this section remains in
effect until the final resolution of the related criminal proceeding. A motion
for a stay by the defendant in the related criminal proceeding constitutes a
waiver of double jeopardy by the defendant as to the forfeiture action and any
related criminal proceeding.
(3) A forfeiture
action that has been stayed under this section may be consolidated for trial or
other resolution with any related criminal proceeding as provided in ORS
131A.270.
(4) Any party may
file a motion with the court at any time to lift a stay granted under this
section if good cause no longer exists for the stay. [2009 c.78 §34]
Notes of Decisions
Yamhill Cnty. v. Real Prop., 324 Or. App. 412 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 3× “010, the legislature appears to have recognized that the character of forfeiture under Article XV, section 10, raises jeopardy issues; as noted, the legislature specifically addressed potential jeopardy issues in ORS 131A.265 and ORS 131A.270 by providing for stays and the…”
Yamhill Cnty. v. Real Prop., 373 Or. 82 (Or. 2024).
“That recognition is reflected in ORS 131A.265 and 131A.270, which provide for stays or consolidation of related criminal and civil forfeiture actions and which specify that a defendant’s motion to stay a forfeiture or any opposition by the defendant to consolidation “constitutes…”
Yamhill Cnty. v. Real Prop., 373 Or. 82 (Or. 2024).
“That rec- ognition is reflected in ORS 131A.265 and ORS 131A.270, which provide for stays or consolidation of related criminal and civil forfeiture actions and which specify that a defendant’s motion to stay a forfeiture or any opposition by the defendant to consolidation…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131A.265(2) — 1 case
Yamhill Cnty. v. Real Prop., 324 Or. App. 412 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
“010, the legislature appears to have recognized that the character of forfeiture under Article XV, section 10, raises jeopardy issues; as noted, the legislature specifically addressed potential jeopardy issues in ORS 131A.265 and ORS 131A.270 by providing for stays and the…”
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.