Legal Opinion

State v. Clay

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided March 25, 1987No. 86-660, 86-697; CA A40966PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRossman, J.

Defendant appeals his conviction for failure to appear, arguing that he is not bound by the agreement under which he was released from custody. We reverse.

On March 17, 1986, defendant was arrested and placed in custody pending the filing of forgery charges against him. On March 19, he was released, because he had not been arraigned within 36 hours, as required by ORS 135.010. During the release process, he signed a release agreement which required him to appear on April 7 to answer the charge of forgery.1 An indictment charging him with forgery was filed April 4. He did not appear for the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Knutson v. CuppOregon Supreme Court · 1979

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. EastmanCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1992
  2. State v. GrahamCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API