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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.901 (2026)

Effect of compliance or noncompliance with agreement; effect of partial compliance in subsequent criminal proceedings; record of participation in program

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

      135.901 Effect of compliance or noncompliance with agreement; effect of partial compliance in subsequent criminal proceedings; record of participation in program. (1) If the district attorney finds at the termination of the diversion period or any time prior thereto that the divertee has failed to fulfill the terms of the diversion agreement, the district attorney shall terminate diversion and the court shall resume criminal proceedings. However, if the former divertee is adjudicated guilty as a result thereof, the court may take into consideration at the time of the sentencing any partially successful fulfillment by such person of the terms of agreement.

      (2) If the district attorney informs the court at the termination of the diversion period that the defendant has fulfilled the terms of the diversion agreement, the court shall dismiss with prejudice the criminal charges filed against the defendant.

      (3) A record of the fact that an individual has participated in diversion shall be forwarded to and kept by the Department of Justice, and shall be made available upon request to any district attorney who subsequently considers diversion of such person. [1977 c.373 §5; 1981 c.64 §2]

 

      135.905 [1987 c.905 §10; 1999 c.59 §27; repealed by 2012 c.81 §7]

 

      135.907 [1989 c.1075 §5; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

      135.909 [1989 c.1075 §6; 1993 c.13 §2; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

      135.911 [1989 c.1075 §7; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

      135.913 [1989 c.1075 §8; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

      135.915 [1989 c.1075 §9; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

      135.917 [1989 c.1075 §11; 2009 c.595 §93; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

      135.919 [1989 c.1075 §10; 2015 c.258 §2; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

      135.921 [1989 c.1075 §12; 1991 c.460 §19; 1991 c.818 §4; 1993 c.13 §3; 2003 c.737 §§62,63; 2005 c.702 §§73,74,75; 2007 c.71 §34; 2011 c.595 §165; repealed by 2017 c.21 §126]

 

(Bad Check)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1982–2017 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Harmon v. Blanding, 644 P.2d 1082 (Or. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. Harmon v. Blanding, 644 P.2d 1082 (Or. 1982). · cites it 7× “The issue in this proceeding is whether, under ORS 135.901, when the district attorney decides to terminate diversion, the court is required to hold a hearing to determine if diversion should be terminated and, if so, the nature of the hearing.”
State v. McLean, 401 P.3d 252 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). “”); see also ORS 135.901(2) (“If the district attorney informs the court at the termination of the *691 diversion period that the defendant has fulfilled the terms of the diversion agreement, the court shall dismiss with prejudice the criminal charges filed against the…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.901(1) — 1 case
State Ex Rel. Harmon v. Blanding, 644 P.2d 1082 (Or. 1982). “The issue in this proceeding is whether, under ORS 135.901, when the district attorney decides to terminate diversion, the court is required to hold a hearing to determine if diversion should be terminated and, if so, the nature of the hearing.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 135.901(2) — 1 case
State v. McLean, 401 P.3d 252 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). “”); see also ORS 135.901(2) (“If the district attorney informs the court at the termination of the *691 diversion period that the defendant has fulfilled the terms of the diversion agreement, the court shall dismiss with prejudice the criminal charges filed against 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.