ORS 133.735¹
Suppression of intercepted communications
  • procedure
  • grounds
  • appeal

(1) Any aggrieved person in any trial, hearing or proceeding in or before any court, department, officer, agency, regulatory body or other authority of the state, or a political subdivision thereof, may move to suppress the contents of any wire, electronic or oral communication intercepted under ORS 133.724 (Order for interception of communications), or evidence derived therefrom, on the grounds that:

(a) The communication was unlawfully intercepted;

(b) The order of authorization or approval under which it was intercepted is insufficient on its face; or

(c) The interception was not made in conformity with the order of authorization or approval.

(2) Such motion shall be made before the trial, hearing or proceeding unless there was no opportunity to make such motion or the person was not aware of the grounds of the motion. If the motion is granted, the contents of the intercepted wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, shall be treated as having been unlawfully obtained. The judge, upon the filing of such motion by the aggrieved person, may in the judge’s discretion make available to the aggrieved person or the person’s counsel for inspection such portions of the intercepted communications or evidence derived therefrom as the judge determines to be in the interests of justice.

(3) In addition to any other right to appeal, the state shall have the right to appeal from an order granting a motion to suppress under subsection (1) of this section. [1979 c.716 §10; 1989 c.983 §11]

Notes of Decisions

Recording of telephone conversa­tion by police of­fi­cer-party to conversa­tion was not “intercep­tion” subject to suppression for failure to obtain court order. State v. Underwood, 293 Or 389, 648 P2d 847 (1982)

Proper sanc­tion for failure to minimize intercep­tion of communica­tions not covered by warrant is suppression of all intercepted communica­tions. State v. Tucker, 62 Or App 512, 662 P2d 345 (1983), Sup Ct review denied

ORS 165.540 (Obtaining contents of communications) pro­vi­sion allowing police to obtain certain conversa­tions upon existence of probable cause or exigent circumstances does not make conversa­tions obtained without court order, or in­for­ma­­tion derived from conversa­tions, admissible. State v. Fleetwood, 331 Or 511, 16 P3d 503 (2000); State v. Cleveland, 331 Or 531, 16 P3d 514 (2000)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 133—Arrest and Related Procedures; Search and Seizure; Extradition, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors133.­html (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2019, Chapter 133, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano133.­html (2019) (last ac­cessed May 16, 2020).
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent. Currency Information