138.580
Petition. The
petition shall be certified by the petitioner. Facts within the personal
knowledge of the petitioner and the authenticity of all documents and exhibits
included in or attached to the petition must be sworn to affirmatively as true
and correct. The Supreme Court, by rule, may prescribe the form of the
certification. The petition shall identify the proceedings in which petitioner
was convicted and any appellate proceedings thereon, give the date of entry of
judgment and sentence complained of and identify any previous post-conviction
proceedings that the petitioner has undertaken to secure a post-conviction
remedy, whether under ORS 138.510 to 138.680 or otherwise, and the disposition
thereof. The petition shall set forth specifically the grounds upon which
relief is claimed and shall state clearly the relief desired. All facts within
the personal knowledge of the petitioner shall be set forth separately from the
other allegations of fact and shall be certified as provided in this section.
Except as provided in rules adopted under ORS 1.002, affidavits, records or
other documentary evidence supporting the allegations of the petition shall be
attached to the petition. Argument, citations and discussion of authorities
shall be omitted from the petition but may be submitted in a separate
memorandum of law. [1959 c.636 §8; 1991 c.885 §1; 1993 c.517 §4; 2015 c.119 §2]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
43
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1962–2026 · leading case:
Ogle v. Nooth, 330 P.3d 572 (Or. 2014).
Ogle v. Nooth, 330 P.3d 572 (Or. 2014).
· cites it 46× “ORS 138.580 requires that a petitioner seeking relief under that act attach to the petition “[affidavits, records or other documentary evidence supporting the allegations of the petition ***.”
Ogle v. Nooth, 298 P.3d 32 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 25× “Petitioner argues that the post-conviction court erred when it granted the state’s motion to dismiss his petition for failing to attach “[affidavits, records or other documentary evidence supporting the allegations of the petition,” as required by ORS 138.580. We agree with…”
Ogle v. Nooth, 453 P.3d 1274 (Or. 2019).
· cites it 5× “The superintendent moved to dismiss that petition on the ground it did not comply with the requirement, established by ORS 138.580, that supporting documents be attached to post-conviction petitions.”
Harrison v. Hall, 156 P.3d 141 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 9× “]” ORS 138.580. Despite petitioner’s opposition to the motion, the trial court struck the first amended petition for failure to comply with ORS 138.”
Eklof v. Steward, 385 P.3d 1074 (Or. 2016).
· cites it 2× “Nooth, 355 Or 570 , 330 P3d 572 (2014), this court discussed the requirement in ORS 138.580 that materials supporting a post-conviction claim must be attached to the petition.”
Stevens v. Czerniak, 84 P.3d 140 (Or. 2004).
· cites it 2× “4 We also note that, in entering the amended trial management order, the trial court agreed with defendant that ORS 138.580 authorized it to require petitioner to submit his evidence solely in written form unless a disputed factual issue turned on a witness’s credibility.”
Datt v. Hill, 227 P.3d 714 (Or. 2010).
· cites it 2× “) ORS 138.580 provides, in part: *679 “The petition shall set forth specifically the grounds upon which relief is claimed, and shall state clearly the relief desired.”
Pedroso v. Nooth, 284 P.3d 1207 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 6× “” Petitioner attached various trial exhibits to his petition, as contemplated by ORS 138.580, which provides, among other things, that “[a]ffidavits, records or other documentary evidence supporting the allegations of the petition shall be attached to the petition.”
Stoeckert v. Nooth, 344 P.3d 136 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 13× “Petitioner appeals the post-conviction court’s judgment dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief for lack of sufficient documentation, ORS 138.580. 1 Petitioner argues that his post-conviction relief petition properly stated claims for relief, and that, as to several…”
Lizarraga-Regalado v. Premo, 390 P.3d 1079 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 3× “Defendant concurrently asserted that the first amended petition, including the fourth claim, did not comply with the “attachment” requirement of ORS 138.580, which provides that “affidavits, records or other documentary evidence supporting the allegations of the petition shall…”
Schultz v. Franke, 359 P.3d 487 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 7× “1 Petitioner argues that the post-conviction court erred when it dismissed that claim after concluding that petitioner had failed to comply with the attachment requirements of ORS 138.580. As explained below, we conclude that petitioner’s argument on appeal is unpreserved and…”
Pinnell v. Palmateer, 114 P.3d 515 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “Furthermore, we do not agree with petitioner’s assertion that we can adequately review whether the verdict form properly stated the law, based on the second penalty-phase trial court’s instruction regarding the signature page of the verdict form.”
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.