136.567
Issuance of subpoena for witnesses for defendant; bar to dismissal. (1) A defendant in a criminal
action is entitled, at the expense of the state or city, to have subpoenas
issued for not to exceed 10 witnesses within the state. A defendant is
entitled, at the expense of the defendant, to have subpoenas issued for any number
of additional witnesses without an order of the court. The defendant is
responsible for the costs of serving the subpoenas and for the costs, as
provided in ORS 136.602, of witness per diem and mileage and for expenses
allowed under ORS 136.603.
(2) Any subpoena
that a defendant in a criminal action is entitled to have issued shall be
issued:
(a) Upon
application of the defendant, by the clerk of the court in which the criminal
action is pending for trial, and in blank, under the seal of the court and
subscribed by the clerk; or
(b) By an
attorney of record of the defendant, and subscribed by the attorney.
(3) A prosecution
for violation of ORS 813.010 may not be dismissed based solely on the
unavailability of a witness who was subpoenaed by the defendant to provide
testimony with respect to an instrument that was used to test a person’s
breath, blood or urine to determine the alcoholic content of the person’s
blood. This subsection does not apply to the subpoena of an officer or employee
of a public body, as defined in ORS 174.109. [Formerly 139.050; 1977 c.746 §4;
1981 c.174 §1; 1987 c.606 §2; 1989 c.171 §17; 2007 c.581 §3]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
15
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case:
State v. Cartwright, 85 P.3d 305 (Or. 2004).
State v. Cartwright, 85 P.3d 305 (Or. 2004).
· cites it 7× “Defendant contends that that right derives from three sources: (1) the subpoena statutes found at ORS 136.567 and ORS 136.580; (2) the compulsory process provisions of the Oregon and United States constitutions; and (3) the Confrontation Clauses of Article I, section 11, of the…”
State v. Bray, 383 P.3d 883 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 3× “See ORS 136.567. A person who has been subpoenaed has *612 an obligation to appear as a witness and give evidence.”
State v. Fair, 302 P.3d 417 (Or. 2013).
“See Or Const, Art I, § 11 (accused in criminal case has right to compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor); ORS 136.567 (defendant in criminal action entitled to subpoena witnesses at state expense).”
State v. Spada, 594 P.2d 815 (Or. 1979).
· cites it 2× “4 The State concedes that the records defendant seeks in this particular case could have been obtained by means of a subpena duces tecum pursuant to ORS 136.567 and 136.580. 5 The State also concedes that the records are subject to disclosure pursuant to the Public *310 Records…”
State v. Ghim, 381 P.3d 789 (Or. 2016).
“565 (district attorney); ORS 136.567 (defense counsel). Those subpoenas may require the witness either to bring books, papers and documents with them to trial or to produce those documents before trial.”
State Ex Rel. Hathaway v. Hart, 708 P.2d 1137 (Or. 1985).
“415 provides: “A defendant in a criminal action is presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved.”
State v. Running, 87 P.3d 656 (Or. 2004).
“First, subsection (2) presupposes the existence of a subpoena duces tecum issued in accordance with ORS 136.567 and ORS 136.580(1), i.e., one that properly summons documentary materials to trial or to some other court proceeding where they ‘are to be offered in evidence.”
State v. Jackson, 196 P.3d 559 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“The state argues further that, even if the trial court erred by denying the motion to compel, the error was either harmless or moot because defendant had ample opportunity to obtain the exemplars from the witnesses, who were willing to give them to defendant.”
State ex rel. Hathaway v. Hart, 690 P.2d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Similarly, a defendant has the right to secure the attendance of witnesses, ORS 136.567, and to confront and cross-examine witnesses against him.”
State v. Davis, 505 P.3d 1057 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 3× “Cartwright, 336 Or 408 , 419- 20, 85 P3d 305 (2004) (applying that standard for statutory arguments under ORS 136.567 and ORS 136.580). A defendant’s entitlement to issue subpoenas for documents and testimony is provided by ORS 136.”
State v. McGee, 220 P.3d 50 (Or. 2009).
“ORS 136.567 provides, in part: “(1) A defendant in a criminal action is entitled, at the expense of the state or city, to have subpoenas issued for not to exceed 10 witnesses within the state.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.567(1) — 2 cases
State v. Bray, 383 P.3d 883 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“See ORS 136.567. A person who has been subpoenaed has *612 an obligation to appear as a witness and give evidence.”
State v. Davis, 505 P.3d 1057 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“Cartwright, 336 Or 408 , 419- 20, 85 P3d 305 (2004) (applying that standard for statutory arguments under ORS 136.567 and ORS 136.580). A defendant’s entitlement to issue subpoenas for documents and testimony is provided by ORS 136.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.567(2) — 1 case
State v. Cartwright, 85 P.3d 305 (Or. 2004).
“Defendant contends that that right derives from three sources: (1) the subpoena statutes found at ORS 136.567 and ORS 136.580; (2) the compulsory process provisions of the Oregon and United States constitutions; and (3) the Confrontation Clauses of Article I, section 11, of 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.