Oregon Statutes 475.235 – Burden of proof; status of analysis of controlled substance; notice of objection
(1) It is not necessary for the state to negate any exemption or exception in ORS § 475.005 to 475.285 and 475.752 to 475.980 in any complaint, information, indictment or other pleading or in any trial, hearing or other proceeding under ORS § 475.005 to 475.285 and 475.752 to 475.980. The burden of proof of any exemption or exception is upon the person claiming it.
Terms Used In Oregon Statutes 475.235
- Complaint: A written statement by the plaintiff stating the wrongs allegedly committed by the defendant.
- Defendant: In a civil suit, the person complained against; in a criminal case, the person accused of the crime.
- Evidence: Information presented in testimony or in documents that is used to persuade the fact finder (judge or jury) to decide the case for one side or the other.
- Grand jury: agreement providing that a lender will delay exercising its rights (in the case of a mortgage,
- Indictment: The formal charge issued by a grand jury stating that there is enough evidence that the defendant committed the crime to justify having a trial; it is used primarily for felonies.
- Person: includes individuals, corporations, associations, firms, partnerships, limited liability companies and joint stock companies. See Oregon Statutes 174.100
- Preliminary hearing: A hearing where the judge decides whether there is enough evidence to make the defendant have a trial.
- Trial: A hearing that takes place when the defendant pleads "not guilty" and witnesses are required to come to court to give evidence.
(2) In the absence of proof that a person is the duly authorized holder of an appropriate registration or order form issued under ORS § 475.005 to 475.285 and 475.752 to 475.980, the person is presumed not to be the holder of the registration or form. The burden of proof is upon the person to rebut the presumption.
(3)(a) When a controlled substance is at issue in a criminal proceeding before a grand jury, at a preliminary hearing, in a proceeding on a district attorney’s information, during a proceeding on a Class E violation or for purposes of an early disposition program, it is prima facie evidence of the identity of the controlled substance if:
(A) A sample of the controlled substance is tested using a presumptive test for controlled substances;
(B) The test is conducted by a law enforcement officer trained to use the test or by a forensic scientist; and
(C) The test is positive for the particular controlled substance.
(b) When the identity of a controlled substance is established using a presumptive test for purposes of a criminal proceeding before a grand jury, a preliminary hearing, a proceeding on a district attorney’s information or an early disposition program, the defendant, upon notice to the district attorney, may request that the controlled substance be sent to a state police forensic laboratory for analysis. The defendant may not make a request under this paragraph concerning a controlled substance at issue in a proceeding on a Class E violation.
(4) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in all prosecutions in which an analysis of a controlled substance or sample was conducted, a certified copy of the analytical report signed by the director of a state police forensic laboratory or the analyst or forensic scientist conducting the analysis shall be admitted as prima facie evidence of the results of the analytical findings unless the defendant has provided notice of an objection in accordance with subsection (5) of this section.
(5) If the defendant intends to object at trial to the admission of a certified copy of an analytical report as provided in subsection (4) of this section, not less than 15 days prior to trial the defendant shall file written notice of the objection with the court and serve a copy on the district attorney.
(6) As used in this section:
(a) ‘Analyst’ means a person employed by the Department of State Police to conduct analysis in forensic laboratories established by the department under ORS § 181A.150.
(b) ‘Presumptive test’ includes, but is not limited to, chemical tests using Marquis reagent, Duquenois-Levine reagent, Scott reagent system or modified Chen’s reagent. [1977 c.745 § 23; 1989 c.194 § 1; 1995 c.440 § 6; 1997 c.346 § 1; 2001 c.870 § 14; 2003 c.538 § 1; 2007 c.636 1,2; 2009 c.610 § 8; 2021 c.591 § 42]