2015 ORS 161.270¹
Duress

(1) The commission of acts which would otherwise constitute an offense, other than murder, is not criminal if the actor engaged in the proscribed conduct because the actor was coerced to do so by the use or threatened use of unlawful physical force upon the actor or a third person, which force or threatened force was of such nature or degree to overcome earnest resistance.

(2) Duress is not a defense for one who intentionally or recklessly places oneself in a situation in which it is probable that one will be subjected to duress.

(3) It is not a defense that a spouse acted on the command of the other spouse, unless the spouse acted under such coercion as would establish a defense under subsection (1) of this section. [1971 c.743 §34; 1987 c.158 §22]

Notes of Decisions

Duress requires that danger must be present, imminent, and impending. State v. Fitzgerald, 14 Or App 361, 513 P2d 817 (1973); State v. Boldt, 116 Or App 480, 841 P2d 1196 (1992)

Under evidence that defendant, convicted of armed robbery, had several opportunities to escape, he could not object to jury instruc­tion stating that duress is not available as de­fense if per­son inten­tionally or recklessly placed himself in duress situa­tion. State v. Fowler, 37 Or App 299, 587 P2d 104 (1978)

Where threat of injury, if there was one, existed on day defendant was scheduled to appear in court and was condi­tioned on what he might do on that date, threat was imminent. State v. Boldt, 116 Or App 480, 841 P2d 1196 (1992)

Earnest resistance is generalized standard not measured by defendants submissiveness or other individual per­sonality traits. State v. VanNatta, 149 Or App 587, 945 P2d 1062 (1997), Sup Ct review denied

Chapter 161

Notes of Decisions

A juvenile court adjudica­tion of whether or not a child committed acts which would be a crim­i­nal viola­tion if committed by an adult must necessarily include an adjudica­tion of all af­firm­a­tive de­fenses that would be available to an adult being tried for the same crim­i­nal viola­tion. State ex rel Juvenile Dept. v. L.J., 26 Or App 461, 552 P2d 1322 (1976)

Law Review Cita­tions

2 EL 237 (1971); 51 OLR 427-637 (1972)

Chapter 161

Criminal Code

(Generally)

Notes of Decisions

Legislatures adop­tion of 1971 Criminal Code did not abolish doctrine of transferred intent. State v. Wesley, 254 Or App 697, 295 P3d 1147 (2013), Sup Ct review denied


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 161—General Provisions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors161.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 161, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano161.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
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.