136.602
Witness fees payable by county; method of payment; defense witness fees payable
by defendant. (1)
Except as otherwise specifically provided by law, the per diem fees and mileage
and any expenses allowed under ORS 136.603 due to any witness in a grand jury
proceeding, or any prosecution witness in a criminal action or proceeding in a
circuit or justice court or before a committing magistrate shall be paid by the
county in which the grand jury proceeding or criminal action or proceeding is
held. Payment shall be made upon a claim verified by the witness, showing the
number of days attended and the number of miles traveled, and a certified
statement, prepared by the district attorney, justice of the peace or
committing magistrate, showing the amounts due the witness.
(2) The per diem
fees and mileage due to any defense witness in a criminal action or proceeding
in a circuit or justice court, or before a committing magistrate, and any
expenses allowed the witness under ORS 136.603, shall be paid by the defendant.
In the case of a defendant determined to be financially eligible for appointed
counsel at state expense, these amounts may be paid pursuant to ORS 135.055. [1981
s.s. c.3 §63; 1983 c.401 §1; 1987 c.606 §3; 1989 c.171 §18; 1989 c.1053 §3;
2001 c.962 §87]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2022 · leading case:
State v. Ferman-Velasco, 41 P.3d 404 (Or. 2002).
State v. Ferman-Velasco, 41 P.3d 404 (Or. 2002).
· cites it 13× “Both parties rely upon the interplay (or lack thereof) between two statutes — ORS 136.602(1) and ORS 161.665(1) — to support their conflicting contentions respecting the trial court’s order.”
State v. Ferman-Velasco, 971 P.2d 897 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 8× “Defendant argues that Hastings was wrongly decided and that under ORS 136.602, [1] the state *899 is financially responsible for its witnesses and a defendant is financially responsible only for his or her witnesses.”
State v. Davis, 505 P.3d 1057 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“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.”
State v. Pyle, 516 P.3d 273 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“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 mile- age and for expenses allowed under ORS 136.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 136.602(1) — 2 cases
State v. Ferman-Velasco, 41 P.3d 404 (Or. 2002).
“Both parties rely upon the interplay (or lack thereof) between two statutes — ORS 136.602(1) and ORS 161.665(1) — to support their conflicting contentions respecting the trial court’s order.”
State v. Ferman-Velasco, 971 P.2d 897 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
“Defendant argues that Hastings was wrongly decided and that under ORS 136.602, [1] the state *899 is financially responsible for its witnesses and a defendant is financially responsible only for his or her witnesses.”
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.