Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.005 (2026)

Challenge to jury panel

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

      136.005 Challenge to jury panel. (1) The district attorney or the defendant in a criminal action may challenge the jury panel on the ground that there has been a material departure from the requirements of the law governing selection of jurors by filing a motion with the court supported by an affidavit alleging facts that, if true, constitute a material departure from the requirements of the law governing the selection of jurors. The party making the motion shall serve the motion and supporting affidavit on the other party, the trial court administrator and the State Court Administrator.

      (2) A challenge to the panel shall be made before the voir dire examination of the jury.

      (3) If the court determines that there has been a material departure from the requirements of the law governing selection of jurors, the court shall:

      (a) Stay the proceedings pending the selection of a jury panel in conformity with the applicable provisions of law; and

      (b) Grant such other relief as may be appropriate.

      (4) The procedures prescribed by this section are the exclusive means by which a district attorney or defendant may challenge a jury panel. [1973 c.836 §222; 2001 c.779 §17]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1989–2005 · leading case: State v. Rogers, 55 P.3d 488 (Or. 2002).
State v. Rogers, 55 P.3d 488 (Or. 2002). · cites it 13× “275, and ORS 136.005, to provide procedures for criminal defendants to obtain jury lists.”
State Ex Rel. Click v. Brownhill, 15 P.3d 990 (Or. 2000). · cites it 8× “With respect to criminal juries, ORS 136.005(1) provides: "The district attorney or the defendant in a criminal action may challenge the jury panel on the ground that there has been a material departure from the requirements of the law governing selection of jurors.”
State Ex Rel. Penn v. Norblad, 918 P.2d 426 (Or. 1996). “, ORS 136.005 (a defendant may challenge jury panel); ORS 136.”
State v. Meyers, 958 P.2d 187 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). “855 (discovery of work product and other information in defense of a criminal action); ORS 136.005 (challenging a jury panel in a criminal action); ORS 136.”
State v. Running, 87 P.3d 656 (Or. 2004). “005(1) provided that both the district attorney and a criminal defendant could challenge the jury panel “on the ground that there has been a material departure from the requirements of the law governing the selection of jurors [;]” (2) the “requirements of the law governing…”
Jury Serv. Resource Ctr. v. Carson, 110 P.3d 594 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “275, a person who wants to “challengfe] a jury panel under ORS 136.005 or ORCP 57 A,” that is, the litigant in a civil or criminal trial who asserts that the jury was unlawfully selected, may *112 request access to information otherwise confidential under ORS 10.”
State v. Allen, 26 P.3d 814 (Or. 2001). · cites it 3× “ORS 136.005. 5 Defendant did not make a timely challenge under that statute.”
State ex rel. Schrunk v. Walker, 780 P.2d 731 (Or. 1989). “ORS 136.005 permits either party to a criminal case (the district attorney or the defendant) to challenge the entire jury panel, prior to voir dire, on the ground that there has been “a material departure from the requirements of law governing selection of jurors.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.005(1) — 3 cases
State v. Rogers, 55 P.3d 488 (Or. 2002). “275, and ORS 136.005, to provide procedures for criminal defendants to obtain jury lists.”
State Ex Rel. Click v. Brownhill, 15 P.3d 990 (Or. 2000). “With respect to criminal juries, ORS 136.005(1) provides: "The district attorney or the defendant in a criminal action may challenge the jury panel on the ground that there has been a material departure from the requirements of the law governing selection of jurors.”
State v. Running, 87 P.3d 656 (Or. 2004). “005(1) provided that both the district attorney and a criminal defendant could challenge the jury panel “on the ground that there has been a material departure from the requirements of the law governing the selection of jurors [;]” (2) the “requirements of the law governing…”
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.