State v. Dike
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtJoseph, C. J.
The state appeals an order dismissing an indictment for preindictment delay. We reverse.
Both parties rely on Article I, section 10, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. Section 10 has not been interpreted to protect against preindictment delay. The phrase “justice shall be administered * * * without delay” is directed to unreasonable delay after a charge has been formally made. State v. Serrel, 265 Or 216, 218, 507 P2d 1405 (1973); State v. Vawter, 236 Or 85, 90, 386 P2d 915 (1963). The provision parallels the Sixth Amendment protection of the right to a…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. MarionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- United States v. MacDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- State v. VawterOregon Supreme Court · 1963
- State v. McDonaldOregon Supreme Court · 1961
- State v. SerrellOregon Supreme Court · 1973
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. GreenCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- State v. WeberCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- State v. BootsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
- State v. VasquezCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2001
- State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.