Legal Opinion
State v. Bateham
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided December 30, 1919PublishedCited by 40 opinions
From Multnomah: Robert G. Morrow, Judge. Department 1. On July 30,1918, the defendant was indicted in Multnomah County for an offense -defined and made punishable by Section 2099, L. O. L., as amended by Chapter 21, Laws of 1913. He was tried December 20th of that year and from the resulting judgment of conviction he has appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The first contention of defendant is that he was entitled to have the indictment dismissed because he had not been brought to trial at the next term after accusation had been filed. He relies upon Section 1701, L. O. L., reading thus:
“If a defendant indicted for a crime, whose trial has not been postponed upon his application or by his consent, be not brought to trial at the next term of the court in which the indictment is triable, after it is found, the court must order the indictment to be- dismissed, unless good cause to the contrary be shown.”
The terms of Circuit Court in Multnomah…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- In Re BegerowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
- People v. MorinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- State v. OgdenOregon Supreme Court · 1901
- State v. DorisOregon Supreme Court · 1908
- State v. KuhnIndiana Supreme Court · 1900
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- State v. JohnsonOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- State of Oregon v. KuhnhausenOregon Supreme Court · 1954
- State v. AdamsOregon Supreme Court · 2005
- State v. BouseOregon Supreme Court · 1953
- Spalitto v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1930
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.