Definitions for ORS 30.866 and 163.730 to 163.750
Source:
Section 163.730 — Definitions for ORS 30.866 and 163.730 to 163.750, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors163.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Inclusion of potentially protected speech as conduct that court may elect to prohibit by protective stalking order does not make statute facially overbroad. Shook v. Ackert, 152 Or App 224, 952 P2d 1044 (1998)
“Contact” includes acts that, when learned of, give rise to unwanted relationship or association between petitioner and respondent. Boyd v. Essin, 170 Or App 509, 12 P3d 1003 (2000), Sup Ct review denied
Where speech-based contact is combined with nonexpressive conduct, speech-based contact may create alarm without containing unequivocal threat. Crop v. Crop, 220 Or App 592, 188 P3d 364 (2008)
Defendant did not violate victim’s stalking protective order under ORS 163.750 when defendant sent apology letter to victim because letter was “written communication,” not “object,” as terms are used in this section, and letter did not cause victim reasonable apprehension for personal safety as required for violation of ORS 163.750. State v. Meek, 266 Or App 550, 338 P3d 767 (2014)
Law Review Citations
90 OLR 303 (2011)