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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.580 (2026)

Subpoenas when books, papers or documents are required

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

      136.580 Subpoenas when books, papers or documents are required. (1) If books, papers or documents are required, a direction to the following effect shall be added to the form provided in ORS 136.575: “And you are required, also, to bring with you the following: (describing intelligibly the books, papers or documents required).”

      (2) Upon the motion of the state or the defendant, the court may direct that the books, papers or documents described in the subpoena be produced before the court prior to the trial or prior to the time when the books, papers or documents are to be offered in evidence and may, upon production, permit the books, papers or documents to be inspected and copied by the state or the defendant and the state’s or the defendant’s attorneys. [Formerly 139.080; 1993 c.304 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: State v. Cartwright, 85 P.3d 305 (Or. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Cartwright, 85 P.3d 305 (Or. 2004). · cites it 22× “1 Defendant also filed a motion to compel production of the same material, citing ORS 136.580, set out below, as statutory authority for that motion.”
State v. Bray, 383 P.3d 883 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 7× “575 provides a template for a subpoena directed to an individual, and ORS 136.580 adds, “(1) If books, papers or documents are required, a direction to the following effect shall be added to the form provided in ORS 136.”
State v. Cartwright, 20 P.3d 223 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 7× “” Relying on ORS 136.580, Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, defendant responded to SCAA’s *63 motion by filing a motion to compel production of the tape recordings.”
State v. Running, 87 P.3d 656 (Or. 2004). · cites it 9× “Rather, defendant argues, he is entitled to the jury selection records pursuant to ORS 136.580, the statute governing the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum 12 That statute provides: *558 “(1) If books, papers or documents are required, a direction to the following effect shall…”
State v. Sassarini, 452 P.3d 457 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “Bray, 363 Or 226, 251 , 422 P3d 250 (2018) (stating that “ORS 136.580 provided a statu- tory basis for defendant’s subpoena of [a witness’s] computer and the digital evidence it contains”).”
State v. Ghim, 381 P.3d 789 (Or. 2016). “ORS 136.580; see also ORS 136.583 (authorizing production of out-of-state documents if certain requirements are met).”
State v. West, 279 P.3d 354 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “” The record does not show that defendant ever issued a subpoena under ORS 136.580(1); thus, the precise question raised in defendant’s fourth assignment— that the trial court erred in quashing a subpoena — is rejected without discussion.”
State v. Rose, 330 P.3d 680 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “567 and subject to ORS 136.580(2), criminal process authorizing or commanding the seizure or production of papers, documents, records or other things may be issued to a recipient, regardless of whether the recipient or the papers, documents, records or things are located within…”
State v. Spada, 594 P.2d 815 (Or. 1979). “” ORS 136.580 provides: "If books, papers or documents are required, a direction to the following effect shall be added to the form provided in ORS 136.”
State v. Magana, 159 P.3d 1163 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “563, and ORS 136.580(1), and disclosure of business records does not constitute a search.”
State v. Wixom, 366 P.3d 353 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “Running, 336 Or 545, 561 , 87 P3d 661 (2004) (noting that ORS 136.580 does not allow a criminal defendant to *831 use the subpoena duces tecum as a discovery device).”
State v. Jackson, 196 P.3d 559 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “Before trial, defendant filed a motion under ORS 136.580(2) 2 to compel those prospective witnesses to produce, in advance of trial, handwriting exemplars for analysis by a handwriting expert that defendant had retained to compare the exemplars with the signatures on the packing…”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.580(1) — 8 cases
State v. Cartwright, 85 P.3d 305 (Or. 2004). “1 Defendant also filed a motion to compel production of the same material, citing ORS 136.580, set out below, as statutory authority for that motion.”
State v. Bray, 383 P.3d 883 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “575 provides a template for a subpoena directed to an individual, and ORS 136.580 adds, “(1) If books, papers or documents are required, a direction to the following effect shall be added to the form provided in ORS 136.”
State v. Magana, 159 P.3d 1163 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “563, and ORS 136.580(1), and disclosure of business records does not constitute a search.”
State v. Cartwright, 20 P.3d 223 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “” Relying on ORS 136.580, Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, defendant responded to SCAA’s *63 motion by filing a motion to compel production of the tape recordings.”
State v. West, 279 P.3d 354 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “” The record does not show that defendant ever issued a subpoena under ORS 136.580(1); thus, the precise question raised in defendant’s fourth assignment— that the trial court erred in quashing a subpoena — is rejected without discussion.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.580(2) — 11 cases
State v. Cartwright, 85 P.3d 305 (Or. 2004). “1 Defendant also filed a motion to compel production of the same material, citing ORS 136.580, set out below, as statutory authority for that motion.”
State v. Bray, 383 P.3d 883 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “575 provides a template for a subpoena directed to an individual, and ORS 136.580 adds, “(1) If books, papers or documents are required, a direction to the following effect shall be added to the form provided in ORS 136.”
State v. Cartwright, 20 P.3d 223 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “” Relying on ORS 136.580, Article I, section 11, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, defendant responded to SCAA’s *63 motion by filing a motion to compel production of the tape recordings.”
State v. Rose, 330 P.3d 680 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “567 and subject to ORS 136.580(2), criminal process authorizing or commanding the seizure or production of papers, documents, records or other things may be issued to a recipient, regardless of whether the recipient or the papers, documents, records or things are located within…”
State v. Running, 87 P.3d 656 (Or. 2004). “Rather, defendant argues, he is entitled to the jury selection records pursuant to ORS 136.580, the statute governing the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum 12 That statute provides: *558 “(1) If books, papers or documents are required, a direction to the following effect shall…”
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.