State v. Brownhill

1 Citing case

  1. State v. Running

    336 Or. 545 (Or. 2004)   Cited 3 times
    Noting that ORS 136.580 does not allow a criminal defendant to use the subpoena duces tecum as a discovery device

            In this court, defendant argues that the trial court erred for two reasons when it quashed the subpoenas. First, defendant asserts that the trial court erred because State ex rel Click v. Brownhill, 331 Or. 500, 15 P.3d 990 (2000), decided after the trial court ruled on the motion to quash, held that ORS 10.215(1) does not preclude "use" of information related to jury selection records by a defendant in a criminal action. Second, defendant asserts that the trial court erred when it quashed the subpoenas on the ground that defendant had failed to make a showing that the jury selection records were material and favorable.