135.432 Judge
involvement in plea discussions; responsibilities of trial judge. (1)(a) The trial judge may not
participate in plea discussions, except:
(A) To inquire of
the parties about the status of any discussions;
(B) To
participate in a tentative plea agreement as provided in subsections (2) to (4)
of this section;
(C) To make the
inquiries required by ORS 147.512; or
(D) As provided
in subsection (5) of this section.
(b) Any other
judge, at the request of both the prosecution and the defense, or at the
direction of the presiding judge, may participate in plea discussions.
Participation by a judge in the plea discussion process shall be advisory, and
shall in no way bind the parties. If no plea is entered pursuant to these
discussions, the advice of the participating judge shall not be reported to the
trial judge. If the discussion results in a plea of guilty or no contest, the
parties, if they both agree to do so, may proceed with the plea before a judge
involved in the discussion. This plea may be entered pursuant to a tentative
plea agreement as provided in subsections (2) to (4) of this section.
(2) If a
tentative plea agreement has been reached which contemplates entry of a plea of
guilty or no contest in the expectation that charge or sentence concessions
will be granted, the trial judge, upon request of the parties, may permit the
disclosure to the trial judge of the tentative agreement and the reasons
therefor in advance of the time for tender of the plea. The trial judge may
then advise the district attorney and defense counsel whether the trial judge
will concur in the proposed disposition if the information in the presentence
report or other information available at the time for sentencing is consistent
with the representations made to the trial judge.
(3) If the trial
judge concurs, but later decides that the final disposition of the case should
not include the sentence concessions contemplated by the plea agreement, the
trial judge shall so advise the defendant and allow the defendant a reasonable
period of time in which to either affirm or withdraw a plea of guilty or no
contest.
(4) When a plea
of guilty or no contest is tendered or received as a result of a prior plea
agreement, the trial judge shall give the agreement due consideration, but
notwithstanding its existence, the trial judge is not bound by it, and may
reach an independent decision on whether to grant sentence concessions under
the criteria set forth in ORS 135.415.
(5) With the
consent of the parties and upon receipt of a written waiver executed by the
defendant, the trial judge may participate in plea discussions. [1973 c.836 §173;
1987 c.202 §1; 1997 c.313 §4; 2009 c.178 §33]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
27
cases (
9 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case:
Trujillo v. Maass
Trujillo v. Maass (1991)
or · cites it 55×
“Petitioner alleged that his trial counsel was inadequate for failing "to submit the tentative plea agreement to the Judge for the purpose of getting the Judge to concur in the proposed disposition at the time of sentencing pursuant to ORS 135.432." [7] Petitioner also alleged…”
State v. Heisser (2011)
or · cites it 5×
“390 and ORS 135.432 were amended in 2009. Or Laws 2009, ch 356, § 1; Or Laws 2009, ch 178, § 33.”
State v. Justice (2015)
orctapp · cites it 17×
“On appeal, both parties note that a trial court’s discretion to accept or reject a plea resulting from a plea agreement derives from ORS 135.432. See State v. Armstrong, 44 Or App 219, 223 , 605 P2d 736 , rev den, 289 Or 45 (1980) (citing ORS 135.”
State v. McDonnell (1990)
or · cites it 4×
“There is no office left for ORS 135.432(4) and its cross-reference to ORS 135.”
State v. Adams (1993)
or · cites it 2×
“Neither ORS 135.432 nor ORS 135.407, cited by the Court of Appeals, gave that court authority *402 to remand for a new trial.”
State v. Biles (1979)
or · cites it 3×
“” ORS 135.432, which governs cases in which the accused negotiates a plea, provides that "the trial judge shall give the agreement due consideration, but notwithstanding its existence, he is not bound by it * * These statutes all point to the conclusion that the legislature…”
Rise v. Board of Parole (1987)
or · cites it 4×
“ORS 135.432. [4] It seems inevitable that in making the choice to accept a plea agreement or to remain independent, courts, too, are drawn into the contradiction between pragmatism and principle.”
State v. Craig (2024)
orctapp · cites it 3×
“In that case, the parties entered into a tentative plea agreement governed by ORS 135.432, and the trial court departed from that agreement in sentencing, without giving the defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea as required by ORS 135.”
State v. HEISSER (2009)
orctapp · cites it 4×
“390 and ORS 135.432, the phrase "permit [the plea] to be withdrawn" governs the circumstance in which a defendant seeks to withdraw a previous plea of guilty or no contest; the statute does not provide any authority for the state, or the court on its own motion, to "permit [a…”
State v. Kimsey (2002)
orctapp · cites it 2×
“See generally ORS 135.432. 7 It simply is untenable to suggest, as defendant does, that for a trial judge to invite a prosecutor and a defense attorney to engage in plea negotiations necessarily equates with impermissible bias against a defendant and a design to preclude a fair…”
State v. Barrett (2011)
or
“See ORS 135.432(4) (trial court is not bound by sentencing recommendations made pursuant to plea negotiations).”
Wheeler v. State (2018)
minn
“3:9-3; Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 135.432 (1)(b) ; Vt.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.432(1) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.432(1)(b) — 1 case
State v. Heisser (2011)
or
“390 and ORS 135.432 were amended in 2009. Or Laws 2009, ch 356, § 1; Or Laws 2009, ch 178, § 33.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.432(2) — 3 cases
Trujillo v. Maass (1991)
or
“Petitioner alleged that his trial counsel was inadequate for failing "to submit the tentative plea agreement to the Judge for the purpose of getting the Judge to concur in the proposed disposition at the time of sentencing pursuant to ORS 135.432." [7] Petitioner also alleged…”
State v. Heisser (2011)
or
“390 and ORS 135.432 were amended in 2009. Or Laws 2009, ch 356, § 1; Or Laws 2009, ch 178, § 33.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.432(3) — 7 cases
State v. Heisser (2011)
or
“390 and ORS 135.432 were amended in 2009. Or Laws 2009, ch 356, § 1; Or Laws 2009, ch 178, § 33.”
State v. Craig (2024)
orctapp
“In that case, the parties entered into a tentative plea agreement governed by ORS 135.432, and the trial court departed from that agreement in sentencing, without giving the defendant an opportunity to withdraw his plea as required by ORS 135.”
State v. HEISSER (2009)
orctapp
“390 and ORS 135.432, the phrase "permit [the plea] to be withdrawn" governs the circumstance in which a defendant seeks to withdraw a previous plea of guilty or no contest; the statute does not provide any authority for the state, or the court on its own motion, to "permit [a…”
State v. Justice (2015)
orctapp
“On appeal, both parties note that a trial court’s discretion to accept or reject a plea resulting from a plea agreement derives from ORS 135.432. See State v. Armstrong, 44 Or App 219, 223 , 605 P2d 736 , rev den, 289 Or 45 (1980) (citing ORS 135.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.432(4) — 7 cases
State v. McDonnell (1990)
or
“There is no office left for ORS 135.432(4) and its cross-reference to ORS 135.”
State v. Justice (2015)
orctapp
“On appeal, both parties note that a trial court’s discretion to accept or reject a plea resulting from a plea agreement derives from ORS 135.432. See State v. Armstrong, 44 Or App 219, 223 , 605 P2d 736 , rev den, 289 Or 45 (1980) (citing ORS 135.”
State v. Heisser (2011)
or
“390 and ORS 135.432 were amended in 2009. Or Laws 2009, ch 356, § 1; Or Laws 2009, ch 178, § 33.”
State v. Barrett (2011)
or
“See ORS 135.432(4) (trial court is not bound by sentencing recommendations made pursuant to plea negotiations).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.432(5) — 1 case
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.