Oregon Revised Statutes
Or. Rev. Stat. § 138.680 (2026)
Short title
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
ORSoregonlegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
138.680 Short title. ORS 138.510 to 138.680 may be cited as the Post-Conviction Hearing Act. [1959 c.636 §21]
138.685 [1991 c.885 §3; repealed by 1999 c.1055 §15]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 1987–2016 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Juv. Dep't v. Geist, 796 P.2d 1193 (Or. 1990).
State Ex Rel. Juv. Dep't v. Geist, 796 P.2d 1193 (Or. 1990). “* * * * “[E]ven though we can accept mother’s assertion of a right to competent and effective counsel under the statute, direct appeal on the trial court record is not the appropriate forum.”
Boone v. Wright, 822 P.2d 719 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “510 ORS 138.680. [2] The petition alleges only that petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel, because his trial attorney did not object to imposing restitution.”
Bartz v. State of Oregon, 825 P.2d 657 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). “510 to ORS 138.680 (PCHA) was enacted in 1959, relief under that act became "the exclusive means, after judgment rendered upon a conviction for a crime, for challenging the lawfulness of such judgment or the proceedings upon which it is based.”
Fine v. Zenon, 834 P.2d 509 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). “510 to ORS 138.680. [2] A copy of that letter was attached, as an exhibit, to his amended petition.”
Kinkel v. Persson, 367 P.3d 956 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “680 comprise the whole of the Post-Conviction Hearing Act, see ORS 138.680, and govern both first and successive petitions for post-conviction relief.”
Hunter v. State of Oregon, 761 P.2d 502 (Or. 1988). “510 to ORS 138.680, and, if not, whether the Act denies them a privilege or immunity in violation of Article I, section 20, of the Oregon Constitution or the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
State Ex Rel. Juv. Dep't v. Geist, 775 P.2d 843 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “510 ORS 138.680), and there is no source from which we may derive the authority to create one.”
Haynes v. Keeney, 737 P.2d 149 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “510 - ORS 138.680, challenging nine misdemeanor convictions 1 which occurred between 1965 and 1970.”
Castro v. Maass, 910 P.2d 1156 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “510 to ORS 138.680, seeking relief on several grounds.”
Schantz v. Maass, 834 P.2d 508 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). “510 - ORS 138.680. We treat the petition as one for reconsideration, ORAP 9.”
Turner v. Maass, 831 P.2d 703 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). “510 to ORS 138.680] may be filed without limit in time.”
State v. Young, 266 P.3d 135 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “510 to ORS 138.680 shall include release, new trial, modification of sentence, and such other relief as maybe proper and just.”
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.