Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.330

Trial procedure; polling jurors in writing

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      136.330 Trial procedure; polling jurors in writing. (1) ORS 10.100 and ORCP 58 B, C and D and 59 B through F and G(1), (3), (4) and (5), apply to and regulate the conduct of the trial of criminal actions. The jury in a criminal action may, in the discretion of the court, be polled in writing. If the jury is polled in writing, the written results shall be sealed and placed in the court record.

      (2) ORCP 59 H applies to and regulates exceptions in criminal actions. [Amended by 1959 c.558 §31; 1979 c.284 §113; 1985 c.703 §27]

 

      136.340 [Repealed by 1973 c.836 §358]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 111 cases (30 in the last 5 years), 1970–2026 · leading case: State v. Vanornum
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Vanornum (2013) or · cites it 30× “The court further observed that ORCP 59 H, although otherwise a rule of civil procedure only, applies to criminal actions as a result of ORS 136.330(2).3 Id. The Court of Appeals concluded that defendant’s claim regarding UCrJI 1227 was not reviewable, even under the 2…”
State v. Wiltse (2024) or · cites it 4× “The court explained: “Under ORCP 59 E, applicable to criminal cases under ORS 136.330, a trial court may not instruct the jury ‘with respect to matters of fact, nor comment thereon.”
State v. Brown (1990) or · cites it 4× “” “In charging the jury, the court shall state to them all matters of law necessary for their information in giving their verdict,” ORCP 59B, made applicable to criminal cases by ORS 136.330(1); the court erred by not doing that.”
State v. Stacey (2020) orctapp · cites it 11× “On appeal, defen- dant argues that the court abused its discretion in conducting closing arguments in the manner that it did, because the court relied on the erroneous legal premise that, under ORS 136.330, ORCP 58 B(6)—a civil rule regarding the manner and order of closing…”
State v. Doern (1998) orctapp · cites it 10× “ORCP 58 B(5) is made applicable to criminal trials by ORS 136.330(1), and provides: "Not more than two counsel shall address the jury in behalf of the plaintiff or defendant; the whole time occupied in behalf of either shall not be limited to less than two hours.”
State v. Mains (1983) or · cites it 4× “Indeed, there are occasions when the trial judge's failure to examine a witness may result in a grave injustice. Most questions of a witness by the court should be asked outside the presence of the jury, such as when necessary to properly rule on an offer of proof under OEC…”
State v. Stevens (1991) or · cites it 2× “” ORCP 58B(4), made applicable to criminal trials by ORS 136.330(1), provides that “the plaintiff shall commence and conclude the argument to the jury.”
State v. Gray (2014) orctapp · cites it 3× “” ORCP 59 B; ORS 136.330(1) (providing that ORCP 59 B applies to criminal actions).”
Williams v. Florida (1970) scotus · cites it 2× “I, § 11; Ore. Rev. Stat. §§ 136.330, 136.610 (1967) (five out of six sufficient for verdict in a circuit court except in capital cases).”
State v. Nefstad (1990) or · cites it 3× “ORCP 59 B; ORS 136.330(1). It is undisputed that the trial court's instructions to the jury on the law of aiding and abetting were correct.”
State v. Moen (1990) or · cites it 2× “In compliance with ORCP 59 C(2) and ORS 136.330, the indictment in this case was not submitted to the jury during the guilt phase of the trial and that jury found defendant guilty of aggravated murder solely on evidence properly submitted to it.”
State v. Bowen (2006) or · cites it 2× “4 ORCP 59 E applies in criminal cases, ORS 136.330(1), and provides that “[t]he judge shall not instruct with respect to matters of fact, nor comment thereon.”
Show all 111 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.330(1) — 59 cases
State v. Wiltse (2024) or “The court explained: “Under ORCP 59 E, applicable to criminal cases under ORS 136.330, a trial court may not instruct the jury ‘with respect to matters of fact, nor comment thereon.”
State v. Doern (1998) orctapp “ORCP 58 B(5) is made applicable to criminal trials by ORS 136.330(1), and provides: "Not more than two counsel shall address the jury in behalf of the plaintiff or defendant; the whole time occupied in behalf of either shall not be limited to less than two hours.”
State v. Brown (1990) or “” “In charging the jury, the court shall state to them all matters of law necessary for their information in giving their verdict,” ORCP 59B, made applicable to criminal cases by ORS 136.330(1); the court erred by not doing that.”
State v. Mains (1983) or “Indeed, there are occasions when the trial judge's failure to examine a witness may result in a grave injustice. Most questions of a witness by the court should be asked outside the presence of the jury, such as when necessary to properly rule on an offer of proof under OEC…”
State v. Stevens (1991) or “” ORCP 58B(4), made applicable to criminal trials by ORS 136.330(1), provides that “the plaintiff shall commence and conclude the argument to the jury.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.330(2) — 24 cases
State v. Vanornum (2013) or “The court further observed that ORCP 59 H, although otherwise a rule of civil procedure only, applies to criminal actions as a result of ORS 136.330(2).3 Id. The Court of Appeals concluded that defendant’s claim regarding UCrJI 1227 was not reviewable, even under the 2…”
State v. Brown (1990) or “” “In charging the jury, the court shall state to them all matters of law necessary for their information in giving their verdict,” ORCP 59B, made applicable to criminal cases by ORS 136.330(1); the court erred by not doing that.”
State v. Gray (2014) orctapp “” ORCP 59 B; ORS 136.330(1) (providing that ORCP 59 B applies to criminal actions).”
State v. White (1987) or
State v. Crosby (2007) or
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.