State v. Harris
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLent, J.
The issue is whether defendant’s rights under ORS 136.040 1 were violated when his burglary trial continued in his voluntary absence. We hold they were not.
Defendant was charged with burglary, a felony. Pending outcome of his trial, he had been released from custody. ORS 135.230 to 135.270. Trial commenced upon a Thursday and continued through Friday with defendant present. The state had rested at midafternoon on Friday. Defendant’s father and three brothers completed their testimony as defense witnesses at about 4:15 that afternoon. Defendant had another witness under subpoena, who had…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Diaz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- State v. ChandlerOregon Supreme Court · 1929
- State v. SavanOregon Supreme Court · 1934
- Mulvey v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1949
- Hanley v. StateNevada Supreme Court · 1967
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State v. DeCampCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
- State v. ElliottIdaho Court of Appeals · 1994
- State v. MenefeeCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2014
- State v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
- State v. KeschCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.