419A.190
Effect of adjudicatory hearing or admission. Except as provided in ORS 153.108 (1), proceedings in
adult criminal court and other juvenile court adjudicatory proceedings based on
an act alleged in a petition or citation to have been committed by a child,
ward, youth or adjudicated youth or allegations arising out of the same conduct
are barred when the juvenile court judge or referee has begun taking evidence
in an adjudicatory hearing or has accepted a child, ward, youth or adjudicated
youth’s admission or answer of no contest to the allegations of the petition or
citation. This section does not prevent appeal of any preadjudicatory order of
the court that could be appealed in a criminal case, including, but not limited
to, an order suppressing evidence. [1993 c.33 §46; 1999 c.1051 §134; 2003 c.396
§27; 2021 c.489 §45]
APPEALS
Notes of Decisions
State v. S.-Q. K. (In re S.-Q. K.) (2018)
orctapp · cites it 24×
“The question on appeal is whether ORS 419A.190 required the juvenile court to dismiss the petition in this case as a consequence of the fact that youth previously had been sanctioned for a probation violation in connection with the same incident.”
State v. Harris (1998)
orctapp · cites it 5×
“In support of his argument, defendant relies on ORS 419A.190, which provides, in pertinent part: “Proceedings in adult criminal court * * * based on an act alleged in a petition or citation to have been committed by a child or allegations arising out of the same conduct are *123…”
State v. Lyons (1999)
orctapp · cites it 2×
“Neither party challenges that procedure on appeal, and, consequently, we also treat the issue as raised by a motion to dismiss the indictment.”
State v. G. E. S. (2021)
orctapp · cites it 15×
“The juvenile court denied the motion to dismiss and adjudicated youth on the petition.”
State v. Ortega-Gonsalez (2017)
orctapp
“525 (addressing former jeopardy rules applied to adult crimes) and ORS 419A.190 (addressing former jeopardy rules when applied to acts done by juveniles) no longer apply, and the fact that the state may establish a pattern of racketeering activity based on conduct that had…”
State v. M. A. S. (2020)
orctapp
“200(1) provides: “Except as provided in ORS 419A.190, any person or entity, including, but not limited to, a party to a juvenile court proceeding under ORS 419B.”
State v. C. L. B. (2025)
orctapp · cites it 13×
“First, he argues that the juvenile court’s judgment must be reversed because ORS 419A.190 prohibits successive disposi- tions arising out of the same conduct.”
State v. M. B. (In re M. B.) (2018)
orctapp · cites it 8×
“1 She contends that ORS 419A.190 barred those probation violation proceedings because, based on her admission in Case No.”
State v. C. L. B. (2025)
orctapp · cites it 13×
“First, he argues that the juvenile court’s judgment must be reversed because ORS 419A.190 prohibits successive disposi- tions arising out of the same conduct.”
State ex rel. Juvenile Department v. J. W. (2008)
or
“200(1) provides, in full: “Except as provided in ORS 419A.190, any person or entity, including, but not limited to, a party to a juvenile court proceeding under ORS 419B.”
State v. Jones (2000)
orctapp
“Harris, 157 Or App 119 , 967 P2d 909 (1998), the state was precluded from alleging those juvenile acts as predicate offenses in the ORICO prosecution, because ORS 419A.190 precludes the state from using as a predicate offense in a racketeering prosecution any offense that…”
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.