Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.037

Omnibus hearing; when held; subject; ruling of court; counsel required

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      135.037 Omnibus hearing; when held; subject; ruling of court; counsel required. (1) At any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial thereon, the court upon motion of any party shall, and upon its own motion may, order an omnibus hearing.

      (2) The purpose of an omnibus hearing shall be to rule on all pretrial motions and requests, including but not limited to the following issues:

      (a) Suppression of evidence.

      (b) Challenges to identification procedures used by the prosecution.

      (c) Challenges to voluntariness of admissions or confession.

      (d) Challenges to the accusatory instrument.

      (3) The court, at the time of the omnibus hearing, may also consider any matters that will facilitate trial by avoiding unnecessary proof or by simplifying the issues to be tried, or that are otherwise appropriate under the circumstances to facilitate disposition of the proceeding.

      (4) At the conclusion of the hearing and prior to trial the court shall prepare and file an order setting forth all rulings of the court on issues raised under subsection (2) of this section. The court shall further prepare and file a memorandum of other matters agreed upon at the hearing. Except in a prosecution of the defendant for perjury or false swearing, or impeachment of the defendant, admissions made by the defendant or the attorney of the defendant at the hearing may not be used against the defendant unless the admissions are reduced to writing and signed by the defendant and the attorney.

      (5) This section may not be applied in any proceeding or at any stage of any proceeding where the defendant is not represented by counsel. [1973 c.550 §2; 2009 c.11 §9]

 

(Counsel; Name Used)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1975–2025 · leading case: State v. Caruso
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Caruso (1980) or · cites it 11× “We accepted review of this criminal case in order to consider the extent to which ORS 135.037 requires pretrial omnibus hearings.”
Application of Haynes (1980) or · cites it 4× “The circuit court's order denying plaintiff's release relied on evidence that the same judge had previously heard in an omnibus hearing under ORS 135.037, and the parties have made the transcript of these several hearings part of the record on habeas corpus.”
State v. Jalo (1976) orctapp · cites it 4× “ORS 135.037 provides that the court shall, upon motion of any party, hold a pretrial hearing at which the court may consider any matters which will facilitate trial.”
State v. Shaw (2005) or · cites it 2× “Caruso, 289 Or 315 , 613 P2d 752 (1980), this court considered the propriety of a trial court’s dismissal of an accusatory instrument after the state refused to proceed with the prosecution because it wished to appeal a trial court’s denial of its request for a pretrial omnibus…”
State v. Haynes (1979) or · cites it 2× “After an omnibus hearing, ORS 135.037, Judge Spencer denied the motion in its entirety.”
State Ex Rel. Carlile v. Frost (1998) or · cites it 5× “ORS 135.037(1) permits a trial court to hold an omnibus hearing “[a]t any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial.”
State v. Madison (1981) or · cites it 3× “” 2 Because the state did not object to the timeliness of defendant’s motion we need not decide whether such an oral motion, on the day of trial, comes within the provisions of ORS 135.037. 3 ORS 162.315 provides: "(1) A person commits the crime of resisting arrest if he…”
State v. Koennecke (1976) or · cites it 2× “673, or after an "omnibus hearing" held, in accordance with ORS 135.037. Those contentions were considered by the Court of Appeals in State v.”
State v. Gable (1994) orctapp · cites it 4× “The state argues that ORS 135.037 required defendant to raise any constitutional objections to the admission of his statements at the pretrial omnibus hearing.”
State v. Edwards (2009) orctapp · cites it 5× “Because our decision turns on the interpretation of a statute — ORS 135.037, set out below — we review for errors of law.”
State v. Andrew William Betnar (2007) orctapp · cites it 2× “010 provides, “Motions for pretrial rulings on matters subject to ORS 135.037 and ORS 135.805 to 135.873 must be filed in writing not less than 21 days before trial or within 7 days after the arraignment, whichever is later, unless a different time is permitted by the court for…”
State v. Cheshier (1979) orctapp · cites it 5× “ORS 135.037 provides in material part: "(1) At any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial thereon, the court upon motion of any party shall, and upon its own motion may, order an omnibus hearing.”
Show all 49 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.037(1) — 5 cases
State v. Edgmand (1988) or
State Ex Rel. Carlile v. Frost (1998) or “ORS 135.037(1) permits a trial court to hold an omnibus hearing “[a]t any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial.”
State v. Cheshier (1979) orctapp “ORS 135.037 provides in material part: "(1) At any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial thereon, the court upon motion of any party shall, and upon its own motion may, order an omnibus hearing.”
State v. Lea (1997) orctapp
State v. Madison (1984) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.037(2) — 4 cases
State v. Cheshier (1979) orctapp “ORS 135.037 provides in material part: "(1) At any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial thereon, the court upon motion of any party shall, and upon its own motion may, order an omnibus hearing.”
State Ex Rel. Carlile v. Frost (1998) or “ORS 135.037(1) permits a trial court to hold an omnibus hearing “[a]t any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial.”
State v. Graber (1975) orctapp
State v. Petersen (2012) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.037(2)(a) — 2 cases
State v. Wright (1992) or
State v. Slaughter (2025) or
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.037(3) — 9 cases
State v. Madison (1981) or “” 2 Because the state did not object to the timeliness of defendant’s motion we need not decide whether such an oral motion, on the day of trial, comes within the provisions of ORS 135.037. 3 ORS 162.315 provides: "(1) A person commits the crime of resisting arrest if he…”
State Ex Rel. Carlile v. Frost (1998) or “ORS 135.037(1) permits a trial court to hold an omnibus hearing “[a]t any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial.”
State v. Agee (2015) or
State v. White (1984) orctapp
State v. Browder (1984) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.037(4) — 3 cases
State v. Simons (1987) orctapp
State Ex Rel. Carlile v. Frost (1998) or “ORS 135.037(1) permits a trial court to hold an omnibus hearing “[a]t any time after the filing of the accusatory instrument in circuit court and before the commencement of trial.”
State v. Yarbrough (1976) orctapp
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.