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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.765 (2026)

Dismissal of criminal proceeding not brought to trial within allowed time; exceptions

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

      135.765 Dismissal of criminal proceeding not brought to trial within allowed time; exceptions. (1) On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on its own motion, the court shall dismiss any criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.763.

      (2) This section shall not apply:

      (a) When failure to bring the adult in custody to trial within 90 days after the district attorney receives notice under ORS 135.760 was the result of motions filed on behalf of the adult in custody, or of a grant by the court of a continuance on motion of the district attorney or on its own motion, for good cause shown; or

      (b) When the adult in custody is unavailable for trial, other than by imprisonment, or because of other pending criminal proceedings against the adult in custody. [Formerly 134.530; 1993 c.542 §2; 2019 c.213 §17]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases, 1979–2020 · leading case: State v. Person, 853 P.2d 813 (Or. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Person, 853 P.2d 813 (Or. 1993). · cites it 26× “On June 25, defendant moved to dismiss the indictment pursuant to ORS 135.765, [2] on the ground that he had not been brought to trial within 90 days of the date that the Linn County District Attorney received his speedy trial notice.”
State v. Waechter, 986 P.2d 1281 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 36× “763 and ORS 135.765, [2] and a hearing on that motion was held on November 14.”
State v. Hunter, 850 P.2d 366 (Or. 1993). · cites it 8× “” Finally, ORS 135.765 provides: “On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on the own motion of the court, the court shall dismiss any criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.”
State v. Wideman, 124 P.3d 1271 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “The state appeals from an order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to ORS 135.765. That statute authorizes a trial court to dismiss a case if the state fails to bring an incarcerated defendant to trial within 90 days, unless the court finds good cause to continue…”
State v. Person, 831 P.2d 700 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “The next day, the court notified the new counsel that the April 11 trial date would be reset.”
State v. Ashcroft, 316 P.3d 355 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 20× “” ORS 135.765 provides, in turn: “(1) On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on its own motion, the court shall dismiss any *5 criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.”
State v. Gilliland, 752 P.2d 1255 (Or. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 3× “3 ORS 135.765. 4 The court denied the motion.”
State v. Pinnell, 877 P.2d 635 (Or. 1994). · cites it 2× “" ORS 135.765(1) provides: "On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on its own motion, the court shall dismiss any criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.”
State v. Tatarinov, 155 P.3d 67 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “On May 29, defendant filed a motion under ORS 135.765 to dismiss with prejudice the charges against him.”
State v. Neal, 320 P.3d 664 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “763, and ORS 135.765. ORS 135.760 provides: “(1) Any inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections or of the supervisory authority of a county pursuant to a commitment under ORS 137.”
State v. Ayers, 126 P.3d 1241 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 3× “Notwithstanding the defendant’s lack of consent, the court may grant a continuance on motion of the district attorney or on its own motion, for good cause shown.”
State v. Biscotti, 182 P.3d 269 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “Similarly, ORS 135.765(2)(a) provides for dismissal of a prosecution of an inmate in cases in which the inmate’s statutory speedy trial rights are violated, except when the delay was, among other things, the result of a grant by the court of a continuance “for good cause shown.”
Show all 31 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.765(1) — 5 cases
State v. Pinnell, 877 P.2d 635 (Or. 1994). “" ORS 135.765(1) provides: "On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on its own motion, the court shall dismiss any criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.”
State v. Ayers, 126 P.3d 1241 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). “Notwithstanding the defendant’s lack of consent, the court may grant a continuance on motion of the district attorney or on its own motion, for good cause shown.”
State v. Neal, 320 P.3d 664 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “763, and ORS 135.765. ORS 135.760 provides: “(1) Any inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections or of the supervisory authority of a county pursuant to a commitment under ORS 137.”
Johnson v. Premo, 346 P.3d 686 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Becker, 197 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.765(2) — 4 cases
State v. Alexander, 298 P.3d 55 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
State v. Ashcroft, 316 P.3d 355 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “” ORS 135.765 provides, in turn: “(1) On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on its own motion, the court shall dismiss any *5 criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.”
State v. Neal, 320 P.3d 664 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “763, and ORS 135.765. ORS 135.760 provides: “(1) Any inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections or of the supervisory authority of a county pursuant to a commitment under ORS 137.”
State v. Becker, 197 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.765(2)(a) — 6 cases
State v. Biscotti, 182 P.3d 269 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “Similarly, ORS 135.765(2)(a) provides for dismissal of a prosecution of an inmate in cases in which the inmate’s statutory speedy trial rights are violated, except when the delay was, among other things, the result of a grant by the court of a continuance “for good cause shown.”
State v. Tatarinov, 155 P.3d 67 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “On May 29, defendant filed a motion under ORS 135.765 to dismiss with prejudice the charges against him.”
State v. Neal, 320 P.3d 664 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “763, and ORS 135.765. ORS 135.760 provides: “(1) Any inmate in the custody of the Department of Corrections or of the supervisory authority of a county pursuant to a commitment under ORS 137.”
State v. Ashcroft, 316 P.3d 355 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “” ORS 135.765 provides, in turn: “(1) On motion of the defendant or the counsel of the defendant, or on its own motion, the court shall dismiss any *5 criminal proceeding not brought to trial in accordance with ORS 135.”
State v. Storkus, 479 P.3d 320 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.765(2)(b) — 1 case
State v. Becker, 197 P.3d 44 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
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.