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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 138.020 (2026)

Who may appeal

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

      138.020 Who may appeal. Either the state or the defendant may as a matter of right appeal from a judgment in a criminal action in the cases prescribed in ORS 138.010 to 138.310, and not otherwise.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 50 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1958–2023 · leading case: State v. Partain, 239 P.3d 232 (Or. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Partain, 239 P.3d 232 (Or. 2010). · cites it 31× “ORS 138.020." *237 Id. at 315 , 429 P.2d 565 .”
City of Lowell v. Wilson, 105 P.3d 856 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 6× “The court then rejected the defendants’ arguments that, because a series of Supreme Court decisions had characterized municipal ordinance violations as “crimes,” such violations should be included in the grant of jurisdiction to the Court of Appeals under ORS 138.020 and ORS…”
State v. Shaw, 113 P.3d 898 (Or. 2005). · cites it 2× “Frost, 326 Or 607, 612 , 956 P2d 202 (1998) (“ORS 138.020 limits appeals by the state in criminal cases to those allowed by ORS 138.”
Stevens v. Bispham, 851 P.2d 556 (Or. 1993). · cites it 2× “Following sentencing, the person is entitled to take an appeal, ORS 138.020 and 138.040, and to be represented by counsel on appeal, ORS 138.”
City of Klamath Falls v. Winters, 619 P.2d 217 (Or. 1980). · cites it 3× “Thus, according to defendants, the legislature has provided two overlapping grants of appellate jurisdiction and a defendant convicted of violating a municipal ordinance is free to take either a limited appeal under ORS 221.”
State Ex Rel. Auto. Emporium, Inc. v. Murchison, 611 P.2d 1169 (Or. 1980). · cites it 4× “ORS 138.020 and 138.040, [2] State v. Sanford, 245 Or.”
State v. Davis, 174 P.3d 1022 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 4× “6 *469 The court concluded that its preclusive approach was ultimately derived from the statute authorizing criminal appeals: “[W]hen the state grants a criminal appeal as a matter of right to one convicted of a crime, as it has, our procedural policy should be not to limit that…”
State v. Curran, 628 P.2d 1198 (Or. 1981). · cites it 3× “ORS 138.020 is arguably applicable. That section provides: “* * * [T]he defendant may as a matter of right appeal from a judgment in a criminal action * * *.”
State v. Koennecke, 545 P.2d 127 (Or. 1976). · cites it 2× “ORS 138.020 limits appeals by the state in criminal cases to those allowed by ORS 138.”
State v. Moss, 279 P.3d 200 (Or. 2012). · cites it 4× “According to defendant, because 14 ORS 138.020 provides that "the defendant may as a matter of right appeal from a 15 judgment in a criminal action," this court has limited authority to adopt rules that 16 compromise that right and may only do so if "necessary" for the prompt…”
State v. Colby, 433 P.3d 447 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “2d 290 (1988) (explaining that a criminal defendant has no constitutional right to appeal, and that appellate jurisdiction springs from statute); ORS 138.020 ("Either the state or the defendant may as a matter of right appeal from a judgment in a criminal action in the cases…”
State v. Gangi, 675 P.2d 181 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 4× “We agree with and adopt the analysis of the jurisdictional problem in this case in the state’s brief: “Defendant asserts that ORS 138.020 and 138.040 grant this court jurisdiction of this appeal.”
Show all 50 citing cases →
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.