136.643
Defendant as witness.
In the trial of or examination upon any indictment, complaint, information or
other proceeding before any court, magistrate, jury or other tribunal against a
person accused or charged with the commission of a crime, the person so charged
or accused shall, at the own request of the person, but not otherwise, be
deemed a competent witness, the credit to be given to the testimony of the
person being left solely to the jury, under the instructions of the court, or
to the discrimination of the magistrate, grand jury or other tribunal before
which such testimony is given. The waiver of the person of this right creates
no presumption against the person. The defendant or accused, when offering
testimony as a witness in the own behalf of the defendant, gives the prosecution
a right to cross-examination upon all facts to which the defendant or accused
has testified and which tend to the conviction or acquittal of the defendant or
accused. [Formerly 139.310]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases, 1980–2014 · leading case:
State v. Cox, 98 P.3d 1103 (Or. 2004).
State v. Cox, 98 P.3d 1103 (Or. 2004).
· cites it 3× “See ORS 136.643 (statutory right); 8 State v.”
State v. Castle, 616 P.2d 510 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 2× “As to the first point, we fail to see any relevance the prior infraction would have to dismissal of the DUII charge in this case {see ORS 136.643), 5 or to the remaining charges.”
State v. Mende, 741 P.2d 496 (Or. 1987).
“ORS 136.643. This requirement does not offend federal or state constitutional guarantees against self-incrimination.”
State v. Lea, 934 P.2d 460 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 3× “That statute provides: “In the trial of or examination upon any indictment, complaint, information or other proceeding before any court, magistrate, jury or other tribunal against a person accused or charged with the commission of a crime, the person so charged or accused shall,…”
Wells v. Paulus, 675 P.2d 482 (Or. 1984).
“In order to avoid the use of masculine pronouns another section would amend ORS 136.643, which declares that defendants are competent witnesses and may waive the right to testify without creating a presumption against themselves.”
State v. Strickland, 335 P.3d 867 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
“See ORS 136.643 (prosecution has right to cross-examine defendant “upon all facts to which the defendant * * * has testified” relevant to conviction or acquittal); State v.”
State v. Mende, 730 P.2d 555 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“In support of his motion to dismiss, defendant submitted an affidavit which stated that the passage of time had significantly prejudiced his defense, because the caseworker who had processed his food stamp application had died during the delay, and that she would have testified…”
State v. Wilcher, 326 P.3d 618 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
· cites it 2× “See ORS 136.643 (statutory right to testify); State v.”
State v. Pratt, 102 P.3d 149 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
“Cruse, 231 Or 326, 330 , 372 P2d 974 (1962); see also ORS 136.643. Reversed and remanded.”
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.