Title: State v. Staudinger

State: oregon

Issuer: Oregon Supreme Court

Document:

Filed: August 30, 2001
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

THE STATE OF OREGON,
	Plaintiff-Adverse Party,
	v.
ROBERT LAWRENCE STAUDINGER,
	Defendant-Relator.
(CC 99-CR-0893-AB; SC S47781)

	Original proceeding in mandamus.
	Argued and submitted March 2, 2001.
	Laura Graser, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief
for defendant-relator.
	Kaye E. McDonald, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, argued
the cause and filed the brief for plaintiff-adverse party.  With
her on the brief were Hardy Myers, Attorney General, and Michael
D. Reynolds, Solicitor General.
	Rose Jade, Newport, filed briefs on behalf of amicus curiae
Firebare, Inc.
	Before Carson, Chief Justice, and Gillette, Durham, Leeson,
Riggs, and De Muniz, Justices.*
	PER CURIAM
	Alternative writ of mandamus dismissed.
	*Kulongoski, J., resigned on June 14, 2001, and did not
participate in the decision of this case.
		PER CURIAM
		This is an original mandamus proceeding.  Relator, a
criminal defendant, served subpoenas duces tecum on the State
Court Administrator and the Trial Court Administrator for the
Deschutes County Circuit Court ("administrators").  The subpoenas
sought certain jury composition records, including source lists. 
The trial court granted administrators' motion to quash the
subpoenas.  Relator then petitioned this court for an alternative
writ of mandamus, and we issued the writ.  For the reasons that
follow, we now dismiss that writ.
		While the proceeding was pending before this court, the
legislature passed Oregon Laws 2001, chapter 779 (House Bill
2335).  Sections 14 through 17 of that act set out a procedure
and standards that are to govern a trial court's decision to
release source lists and jury lists.  The act became effective
July 1, 2001.  Relator now may request the records that he seeks
under the provisions of the act. 
		The legislature's intervening enactment makes the
extraordinary remedy of mandamus no longer appropriate in this
proceeding.  See State ex rel Fidanque v. Paulus, 297 Or 711,
717, 688 P2d 1303 (1984) ("mandamus 'is an extraordinary remedial
process which is awarded not as a matter of right, but in the
exercise of a sound judicial discretion * * *'" (quoting Buell v.
Jefferson County Court, 175 Or 402, 408, 152 P2d 578, reh'g den
154 P2d 188 (1944))).  We, therefore, dismiss the alternative
writ.
		Alternative writ of mandamus dismissed.