Chapter 127 Oregon Laws 2003

AN ACT

HB 2115

Relating to criminal procedure; amending ORS 136.295, 161.309 and 163.135.

Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:

SECTION 1. ORS 163.135 is amended to read:

163.135. (1) It is an affirmative defense to murder for purposes of ORS 163.115 (1)(a) that the homicide was committed under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance [when such] if the disturbance is not the result of the person’s own intentional, knowing, reckless or criminally negligent act[,] and [for which disturbance] if there is a reasonable explanation for the disturbance. The reasonableness of the explanation for the disturbance [shall] must be determined from the standpoint of an ordinary person in the actor’s situation under the circumstances [as] that the actor reasonably [believes] believed them to be. Extreme emotional disturbance does not constitute a defense to a prosecution for, or preclude a conviction of, manslaughter in the first degree or any other crime.

(2) The defendant [shall] may not introduce in the defendant’s case in chief expert testimony regarding extreme [mental or] emotional disturbance under this section unless the defendant gives notice of the defendant’s intent to do so.

(3) The notice required [shall] must be in writing and [shall] must be filed at the time the defendant pleads not guilty. The defendant may file [such] the notice at any time after the defendant pleads but before trial [when] if the court determines that there was just cause for failure to file the notice at the time of the defendant’s plea [is made to appear to the satisfaction of the court].

(4) If the defendant fails to file notice, the defendant [shall not be entitled to] may not introduce evidence for the purpose of proving extreme [mental or] emotional disturbance under ORS 163.115 unless the court, in its discretion, [permits such evidence to be introduced where] determines that there was just cause for failure to file notice [is made to appear].

(5) After the defendant files notice as provided in this section, the state [shall have the right to] may have at least one psychiatrist or licensed psychologist of its selection examine the defendant in the same manner and subject to the same provisions as provided in ORS 161.315.

SECTION 2. ORS 161.309 is amended to read:

161.309. (1) No evidence may be introduced by the defendant on the issue of insanity under ORS 161.295, unless the defendant gives notice of intent to do so in the manner provided in subsection (3) of this section.

(2) The defendant may not introduce in the case in chief expert testimony regarding partial responsibility or diminished capacity under ORS 161.300 unless the defendant gives notice of intent to do so in the manner provided in subsection (3) of this section.

(3) A defendant who is required under subsection (1) or (2) of this section to give notice shall file a written notice of purpose at the time the defendant pleads not guilty. The defendant may file such notice at any time after the plea but before trial when just cause for failure to file the notice at the time of making the plea is made to appear to the satisfaction of the court. If the defendant fails to file notice, the defendant shall not be entitled to introduce evidence for the establishment of a defense under ORS 161.295 or 161.300 unless the court, in its discretion, permits such evidence to be introduced where just cause for failure to file the notice is made to appear.

SECTION 3. ORS 136.295 is amended to read:

136.295. (1) ORS 136.290 does not apply to persons charged with crimes which are not releasable offenses under ORS 135.240 or to persons charged with conspiracy to commit murder, or charged with attempted murder, or to prisoners serving sentences resulting from prior convictions.

(2) If the defendant is extradited from another jurisdiction, the 60-day period shall not commence until the defendant enters the State of Oregon, provided that law enforcement authorities from the other jurisdiction and this state have conducted the extradition with all practicable speed. The original 60-day period shall not be extended more than an additional 60 days, except where delay has been caused by the defendant in opposing the extradition.

(3) Any reasonable delay resulting from examination or hearing regarding the defendant’s mental condition or competency to stand trial, or resulting from other motion or appeal by the defendant, shall not be included in the 60-day period.

(4)(a) If a victim or witness to the crime in question is unable to testify within the original 60-day period because of injuries received at the time the alleged crime was committed or upon a showing of good cause, the court may order an extension of custody and postponement of the date of the trial of not more than 60 additional days. The court, for the same reason, may order a second extension of custody and postponement of the date of the trial of not more than 60 days, but in no event shall the defendant be held in custody before trial for more than a total of 180 days. A court may grant an extension based upon good cause as described in paragraph (b)(C), (D) or (E) of this subsection only if requested by the defendant or defense counsel or by the court on its own motion.

(b) As used in this subsection, “good cause” means situations in which:

(A) The court failed to comply with ORS 136.145 and the victim is unable to attend the trial;

(B) The victim or an essential witness for either the state or the defense is unable to testify at the trial because of circumstances beyond the control of the victim or witness;

(C) The attorney for the defendant cannot reasonably be expected to try the case within the 60-day period;

(D) The attorney for the defendant has recently been appointed and cannot be ready to try the case within the 60-day period;

(E) The attorney for the defendant is unable to try the case within the 60-day period because of conflicting schedules;

(F) Scientific evidence is necessary and because of the complexity of the procedures it would be unreasonable to have the procedures completed within the 60-day period;

(G) The defendant has filed notice under ORS 161.309 of the defendant’s intention to rely upon a defense of insanity, [or] partial responsibility or diminished capacity; or

(H) The defendant has filed any notice of an affirmative defense within the last 20 days of the 60-day period.

(5) Any period following defendant’s arrest in which the defendant is not actually in custody shall not be included in the 60-day computation.

Approved by the Governor May 28, 2003

Filed in the office of Secretary of State May 28, 2003

Effective date January 1, 2004

__________