137.060 Form
of bench warrant.
The bench warrant shall
be substantially in the following form:
______________________________________________________________________________
CIRCUIT COURT
FOR THE COUNTY OF
______, STATE OF OREGON
IN THE NAME OF
THE STATE OF OREGON
To any peace officer in
the State of Oregon, greeting:
A B having been
on the ______ day of ______, 2___, convicted in this court of the crime of
(designating it generally), you are commanded to arrest the above-named
defendant forthwith and bring the defendant before such court for judgment or,
if the court has adjourned, deliver the defendant into the custody of the
jailor of this county. By order of the court.
Witness my hand
and seal of said circuit court, affixed at ______, in said county, this ______
day of ______, 2___.
[L. S.]
C
D, Clerk of the Court
______________________________________________________________________________
[Amended by 1957 c.659 §1; 1971 c.423 §1; 2015 c.212 §16]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases, 1991–2010 · leading case:
State v. Binner, 886 P.2d 1056 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
State v. Binner, 886 P.2d 1056 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
“Orozco, 129 Or App 148 , 878 P2d 432 (1994), we held that an order of a juvenile court requiring a child adjudicated as a sex offender to submit to a blood extraction, pursuant to ORS 137.060, for DNA testing, did not violate Article I, section 9, because the extraction was not…”
State v. Medinger, 230 P.3d 76 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“ORS 137.060(l)(c). The trial court concluded that the officer had arrested defendant without probable cause, and rejected the state’s inevitable discovery argument.”
State v. Vaughn, 805 P.2d 733 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “The bench warrant issued for defendant’s arrest complies with the requirements of ORS 137.060, 7 and *522 the trial court retained jurisdiction to hold a hearing in 1989.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 137.060(l)(c) — 1 case
State v. Medinger, 230 P.3d 76 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
“ORS 137.060(l)(c). The trial court concluded that the officer had arrested defendant without probable cause, and rejected the state’s inevitable discovery argument.”
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.