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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.370 (2026)

Not guilty plea as denial of allegations of accusatory instrument

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

      135.370 Not guilty plea as denial of allegations of accusatory instrument. The plea of not guilty controverts and is a denial of every material allegation in the accusatory instrument. [Formerly 135.860]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1989–2025 · leading case: State v. Wiltse, 373 Or. 1 (Or. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Wiltse, 373 Or. 1 (Or. 2024). “As dis- cussed, ORCP 59 E prohibits trial courts from commenting on evidence, and one of the purposes of that rule is to protect the jury’s role as the ultimate factfinder.”
State v. Pitt, 293 P.3d 1002 (Or. 2012). “7 *580 The state argues that, even absent proof that the charged act occurred, defendant’s not guilty plea alone was sufficient to make the evidence of uncharged misconduct relevant.”
State v. Steed, 340 Or. App. 352 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “)) and Tape Recording, Criminal Law Revision Committee, Mar 9, 1972, Tape 5, Side 2 (comments of Commission Chairman Yturri that, under the draft, the effect of a no contest plea was a guilty plea so that it made little difference which plea was entered); with Commentary §§…”
State v. Ritchie, 475 P.3d 903 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “365, which provides that a trial court “may at any time before judgment, upon a plea of guilty or no contest, permit it to be withdrawn and a plea of not guilty substituted therefore,” and ORS 135.370, which states that a “plea of not guilty controverts and is a denial of every…”
State v. Crocker, 95 Or. App. 260 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “The distinction between those who plead guilty or no contest and those who plead not guilty and are then convicted *267 is meaningful for most appellate purposes.”
State v. Wiltse, 373 Or. 1 (Or. 2024). “As dis- cussed, ORCP 59 E prohibits trial courts from commenting on evidence, and one of the purposes of that rule is to protect the jury’s role as the ultimate factfinder.”
State v. Wiltse, 373 Or. 1 (Or. 2024). “As dis- cussed, ORCP 59 E prohibits trial courts from commenting on evidence, and one of the purposes of that rule is to protect the jury’s role as the ultimate factfinder.”
State v. Steed, 340 Or. App. 352 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “)) and Tape Recording, Criminal Law Revision Committee, Mar 9, 1972, Tape 5, Side 2 (comments of Commission Chairman Yturri that, under the draft, the effect of a no contest plea was a guilty plea so that it made little difference which plea was entered); with Commentary §§…”
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.