State v. Ashcroft
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, P. J.
Defendant, who was convicted of harassment, argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the charge for failure to bring him to trial within 90 days of his request for a timely trial under the inmate speedy-trial statutes, ORS 135.760 to 135.765. As explained below, we conclude that, under the current version of ORS 135.765(2), defendant was not brought to trial within 90 days due to continuances that were authorized by ORS 135.763(2), and, hence, the court was not required to dismiss the case. We therefore affirm.
The facts pertinent to our decision are procedural and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. GainesOregon Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. MeyrickOregon Supreme Court · 1992
- State v. JacksonOregon Supreme Court · 1961
- State v. HunterOregon Supreme Court · 1993
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Canales-Robles v. LaneyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2021