- Criminal Defense: Theft, Burglary, and Shoplifting
- Oregon: Statutory Criminal Law | Without My Consent
- Felony Theft / Theft in the 1st & 2nd Degree
Here, the victim determined from her caller identification box that defendant was calling. By declining to answer, she prevented defendant from completing the crime. On the other hand, had she decided to answer and subject herself to the unwanted and harassing telephone call, defendant would have been guilty of harassment. That curiosity, however, is an issue for the legislature to address.
Criminal Defense: Theft, Burglary, and Shoplifting
Defendant was charged with the crime of telephonic harassment. Indeed, it is likely that the people the legislature most intended to benefit when it enacted ORS However, answering machines were not new technology at the time ORS If the legislature had wanted to include them as part of the telephone or as a method of answering, it could have done so. The petitioner filed a Uniform Stalking Complaint, and the trial court entered a protective order.
They instead conveyed a threat of serious personal assault. If this order proves insufficient to protect petitioner, petitioner may ask the court to modify it. The state contended that spitting should be considered a crime of harassment under ORS Outcome: Reversing the decision of the lower court and remanding for trial applying the proper statutory interpretation. However, even if defendant had left exactly the same message on each occasion, e. Depending on the circumstances, a victim bringing a telephone harassment claim may have a battle to fight in Oregon, which interprets the relevant statute quite strictly.
These provisions are the state equivalent of the federal Wiretap Act. As used in ORS A The state and of a county, municipal corporation or any other political subdivision of the state; and. B A police department established by a university under ORS A Officers, employees or agents of a telecommunication or radio communication company who perform the acts prohibited by subsection 1 a , b and c of this section for the purpose of construction, maintenance or conducting of their telecommunication or radio communication service, facilities or equipment.
B Public officials in charge of and at jails, police premises, sheriffs offices, Department of Corrections institutions and other penal or correctional institutions, except as to communications or conversations between an attorney and the client of an attorney. Electro-Muscular Disruption Technology device includes devices commonly known as tasers.
Facts: The mother of a year-old was worried about her son. With a component of her telephone equipment, she recorded with a component of her telephone equipment.
- Results tell the story of a Medford criminal defense lawyer.;
- find geographical location of ip!
- find people by name and age;
- Oregon Ducks walk-on kicker Zach Emerson arrested for 2 misdemeanors - pisolahfi.cf.
In situations in which a WMC victim is repeatedly harassed, the State may charge a defendant with stalking. This law may come into apply to situations of cyberstalking and cybercrime, both of which are becoming increasingly common. Facts: Because the stalking statute regulates repeated conduct, including some types of communication oral or written , defendant argued that the stalking statute violated his constitutional rights.
The appeals court disagreed. Accordingly, the statute is limited to a threat that convincingly expresses, to the addressee, the intention that it will be carried out, and that the actor has the ability to do so.
Facts: The victim worked in the Marion County Courthouse where she became acquainted with the defendant. The defendant then began calling her work, and her home, as well as her friends and family to try to get access to the victim.
Oregon: Statutory Criminal Law | Without My Consent
The victim spoke to a detective at the local police department and asked him to tell the defendant to leave her alone. He spoke to the defendant and told him that he could be found guilty of stalking if he continued to bother the victim. Several weeks later, the defendant visited the victim at her office. Outcome: The court reversed and remanded with instructions to enter judgment of conviction for only one count of violating an SPO rather than the three counts on which he was convicted at trial.
The remaining contacts on which the state relies, however, did not qualify as repeated unlawful contacts for the reasons set out above. After the defendant expressed interest in a sexual relationship, the victim pulled back, but defendant began to frighten her. For instance, he showed up at her house drunk multiple times and refused to leave.
He also would call her obsessively and threaten to hurt people around her. The victim brought charges and the defendant was convicted of criminal trespass and stalking, and was incarcerated. Defendant was reincarcerated for his probation violations, but he continued to send the victim mail and call her, and he also continued trying to pursue an intimate relationship with her, asking to marry her and making sexual advances. The victim and her mother answered at the same time, and she pretended that she was not on the line.
The defendant called the victim at least ten other times during which he either spoke to her or simply hung up. Each time, the victim told the defendant to stop calling her. Those calls were nonexpressive acts. Although making telephone calls without speaking is not within the express terms of ORS Here, when the victim answered telephone calls from defendant during which he did not speak, that conduct create a relationship or association between them that the victim clearly did not want, as shown by her telling defendant during every telephone conversation not to call her again.
Special Notes: Hang-up phone calls can be interpreted as nonexpressive acts that are considered contacts under the stalking statute. To commit the crime of stalking, a person must make unwanted and repeated e.
It may be particularly apt in situations of cyberstalking and cybercrime, both of which are becoming increasingly common. Research is ongoing. Where a victim is specifically targeted because of his or her race, color, religion, ancestry, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, or mental, physical or sensory handicaps, this statute may provide relief. Defendant challenges only ORS The hatred of another group was not the problem; however, committing a crime against a victim because of his or her membership in the group is a viable offense.
Special Notes: The court determined that the statute was not void for vagueness under any clause of the Oregon or the United States Constitution. Procedural Posture: Magistrate judge findings of fact and conclusions of law following bench trial the parties waived a jury trial. Facts: Plaintiff and her partner, June Swanson, purchased Christmas Valley Lodge and Restaurant from the Park and Recreation district to run the lodge as a restaurant and bar in the rural Oregon town. Plaintiff and Swanson renovated the Lodge after taking possession, and business was good. However, they then began receiving anonymous letters suggesting violence, targeting them because of their sexual orientation.
Local law enforcement began an investigation and determined that the letters could be traced back to defendant Burrows and his family, and defendant eventually pleaded guilty to the charges levied against him. Plaintiff sued defendant for civil damages, alleging intentional infliction of emotional distress, intimidation, invasion of privacy, and libel. The court affirmed the lower court.
Indeed, one need not hate at all to commit this crime; one need only meet the four elements stated above. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation. A person who comes into control of property of another that the person knows or has good reason to know to have been lost, mislaid or delivered under a mistake as to the nature or amount of the property or the identity of the recipient, commits theft if, with intent to deprive the owner thereof, the person fails to take reasonable measures to restore the property to the owner.
For purposes of this subsection, the theft of a companion animal, as defined in ORS Right of possession of property is as follows:. For the purposes of chapter , Oregon Laws , the value of property shall be ascertained as follows:. Note: See note under Obtaining the use of any communication system the use of which is available only for compensation, including but not limited to telephone, computer and cable television systems, or obtaining the use of any services of a public utility nature, without payment or offer to pay for such use is prima facie evidence that the obtaining of the use of such system or the use of such services was gained with intent to avoid payment therefor.
The demand shall be sent to the person who obtained the motor vehicle by rental or lease at the address stated in the rental or lease agreement and any other address of the person provided by the person to the renter or lessor. The person is responsible for providing correct current address information to the renter or lessor until the motor vehicle is returned. The person is responsible for providing correct current address information to the renter or lessor until the item of personal property is returned.
Criminal possession of rented or leased personal property is:. As used in this section and ORS A With the intent to promote the carrying on of unlawful activity; or.
B Knowing that the transaction is designed in whole or in part to:. B Knowing that the monetary instrument or funds involved in the transportation, transmission or transfer represent the proceeds of some form, though not necessarily which form, of unlawful activity and knowing that the transportation, transmission or transfer is designed, in whole or in part, to:. A Promote the carrying on of unlawful activity;. B Conceal or disguise the nature, location, source, ownership or control of property believed to be the proceeds of unlawful activity; or.
C Avoid a transaction reporting requirement under federal law. A The movement of funds by wire or other means;. B One or more monetary instruments;. C The transfer of title to any real property, vehicle, vessel or aircraft; or.
Felony Theft / Theft in the 1st & 2nd Degree
D The use of a financial institution. B Investment securities or negotiable instruments, in bearer form or otherwise in such form that title passes upon delivery. Nothing in ORS As used in ORS Where a building consists of separate units, including, but not limited to, separate apartments, offices or rented rooms, each unit is, in addition to being a part of such building, a separate building.
A sports official may order a coach, team player or spectator to leave the premises at which a sports event is taking place and at which the sports official is officiating if the coach, team player or spectator is engaging in inappropriate behavior. A Any building of another that is not protected property; or. A Protected property of another;. B Any property, whether the property of the person or the property of another person, and such act recklessly places another person in danger of physical injury or protected property of another in danger of damage; or.
C Any property, whether the property of the person or the property of another person, and recklessly causes serious physical injury to a firefighter or peace officer acting in the line of duty relating to the fire; or. B By means of an explosive;. C By starting a fire in an institution while the person is committed to and confined in the institution;. D Which is a livestock animal as defined in ORS E Which is the property of a public utility, telecommunications carrier, railroad, public transportation facility or medical facility used in direct service to the public; or.
F By intentionally interfering with, obstructing or adulterating in any manner the service of a public utility, telecommunications carrier, railroad, public transportation facility or medical facility; or. For purposes of ORS The information must have actual or potential commercial value and give the user of the information an opportunity to obtain a business advantage over competitors who do not know or use the information. Except as provided in paragraph b of this subsection, a violation of the provisions of subsection 4 of this section shall be a Class A misdemeanor.
Upon a conviction for unlawfully applying graffiti, a court, in addition to any fine it imposes and pursuant to ORS The community service must include removing graffiti, either those that the defendant created or those created by another, or both.
- Criminal Lawyer | Oregon Burglary Crimes | Rhett Bernstein!
- how do i find out my incoming mail server.
- portland oregon public records dan duquette;
Upon a conviction for unlawfully possessing a graffiti implement, a court, in addition to any fine it imposes and pursuant to ORS The provisions of ORS It is unlawful for an owner thereof to knowingly permit any polluting substances to remain in any of the places described in this subsection to the injury of the health or to the annoyance of any citizen of this state.
Every 24 hours after conviction for violation of this subsection during which the violator permits the polluting substances to remain is an additional offense against this subsection. This subsection does not apply to a person operating a vehicle transporting passengers for hire subject to regulation by the Department of Transportation or a person operating a school bus described under ORS A Its physical connection or point of contact with the ground or vegetation upon which it was growing; or.