2015 ORS 161.685¹
Effect of nonpayment of fines, restitution or costs
  • report to consumer reporting agency
  • rules

(1) When a defendant who has been sentenced or ordered to pay a fine, or to make restitution, defaults on a payment or installment ordered by the court, the court on motion of the district attorney or upon its own motion may require the defendant to show cause why the default should not be treated as contempt of court, and may issue a show cause citation or a warrant of arrest for the appearance of the defendant.

(2) If the court finds that the default constitutes contempt, the court may impose one or more of the sanctions authorized by ORS 33.105 (Sanctions authorized).

(3) When a fine or an order of restitution is imposed on a corporation or unincorporated association, it is the duty of the person authorized to make disbursement from the assets of the corporation or association to pay the fine or make the restitution from those assets, and if that person fails to do so, the court may hold that person in contempt.

(4) Notwithstanding ORS 33.105 (Sanctions authorized), the term of confinement for contempt for nonpayment of fines or failure to make restitution shall be set forth in the commitment order, and shall not exceed one day for each $25 of the fine or restitution, 30 days if the fine or order of restitution was imposed upon conviction of a violation or misdemeanor, or one year in any other case, whichever is the shorter period.

(5) If it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the default in the payment of a fine or restitution is not contempt, the court may enter an order allowing the defendant additional time for payment, reducing the amount of the payment or installments due on the payment, or revoking the fine or order of restitution in whole or in part.

(6) A default in the payment of a fine or costs or failure to make restitution or a default on an installment on a fine, costs or restitution may be collected by any means authorized by law for the enforcement of a judgment. The levy of execution or garnishment for the collection of a fine or restitution shall not discharge a defendant confined for contempt until the amount of the fine or restitution has actually been collected.

(7) The court, or the court clerk if ordered by the court, may report a default on a court-ordered payment to a consumer reporting agency.

(8) The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall adopt rules under ORS 1.002 (Supreme Court) establishing policies and procedures for reporting a default under subsection (7) of this section to a consumer reporting agency that may include, but are not limited to, limitations on reporting a default to a consumer reporting agency.

(9) Except as otherwise provided in this section, proceedings under this section shall be conducted:

(a) As provided in ORS 33.055 (Procedure for imposition of remedial sanctions), if the court seeks to impose remedial sanctions as described in ORS 33.015 (Definitions for ORS 33.015 to 33.155) to 33.155 (Applicability); and

(b) As provided in ORS 33.065 (Procedure for imposition of punitive sanctions), if the court seeks to impose punitive sanctions as described in ORS 33.015 (Definitions for ORS 33.015 to 33.155) to 33.155 (Applicability).

(10) Confinement under this section may be custody or incarceration, whether actual or constructive.

(11) As used in this section:

(a) Consumer reporting agency means any person that regularly engages for fees, dues, or on a nonprofit basis, in whole or in part, in the practice of assembling or evaluating consumer credit information or other information on consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties.

(b) Restitution has the meaning given that term in ORS 137.103 (Definitions for ORS 137.101 to 137.109). [1971 c.743 §82; 1977 c.371 §5; 1987 c.709 §3; 1987 c.873 §28; 1991 c.724 §27a; 1995 c.79 §50; 1995 c.512 §4; 2015 c.9 §3]

Notes of Decisions

The Oregon recoup­ment scheme does not violate the Equal Protec­tion Clause of the Fourteenth Amend­ment of the U.S. Constitu­tion. Fuller v. Oregon, 417 US 40, 40 L Ed 2d 642, 94 S Ct 2116 (1974)

Evidence, that defendant either had income during 9-month period of nonpay­ment of fine or that he could have sought employ­ment to produce income during such period, was sufficient to support finding that defendant did not make good faith effort to pay fine. State v. Meyer, 31 Or App 775, 571 P2d 550 (1977)

Court had no authority under this sec­tion to impose determinate sen­tence. State v. Benton, 101 Or App 386, 790 P2d 1191 (1990); 102 Or App 585, 795 P2d 601 (1990), affd 311 Or 295, 810 P2d 851 (1991)

Because this pro­vi­sion does not authorize determinate sen­tence, pro­vi­sion is about civil, not crim­i­nal contempt so trial pro­ce­dures did not violate defendants privilege against self-incrimina­tion or right to due process. State v. Benton, 102 Or App 585, 795 P2d 601 (1990), affd 311 Or 295, 810 P2d 851 (1991)

Authoriza­tion to collect fine upon default is permissive and does not create require­ment that default occur prior to collec­tion efforts. Wilkins v. Frink, 158 Or App 76, 971 P2d 494 (1999), Sup Ct review denied

Law Review Cita­tions

11 WLJ 288, 291 (1975); 55 OLR 101 (1976)

Notes of Decisions

Fees of appointed de­fense attorneys and investiga­tion expenses are costs which are assessable to defendant as part of sen­tence. State v. Fuller, 12 Or App 152, 504 P2d 1393 (1973), Sup Ct review denied, affd 40 L Ed 2d 642, 94 S Ct 2116

When sen­tence is imposed and defendant has commenced service of that sen­tence, trial courts jurisdic­tion to supple­ment it by amend­ment is exhausted. State v. Olson, 22 Or App 344, 539 P2d 166 (1975)

As a condi­tion of proba­tion, the defendant may be re­quired to pay for the states witness fees but not jurors fees. State v. Hastings, 24 Or App 123, 544 P2d 590 (1976)

Prevailing party fee cannot be included as part of costs incurred by state and chargeable to convicted crim­i­nal defendant. State v. Marino, 25 Or App 817, 551 P2d 131 (1976)

Due process requires that defendant be afforded notice that costs may be imposed, and be given opportunity to be heard on whether imposi­tion of costs is appropriate. Stacey v. State of Oregon, 30 Or App 1075, 569 P2d 640 (1977)

Expense of transporting defendant to Oregon after waiver of extradi­tion was cost specially incurred by state in prosecuting defendant and was properly assessed as part of sen­tence. State v. Armstrong, 44 Or App 219, 605 P2d 736 (1980), Sup Ct review denied

Criminal defendant can be re­quired to pay costs incurred by state following filing of felony in­for­ma­­tion against him in district court. State v. Haynes, 61 Or App 43, 655 P2d 621 (1982), Sup Ct review denied

Court should consider defendants ability to pay and financial resources before imposing obliga­tion to reimburse state for costs of trial. State v. Armstrong, 71 Or App 467, 692 P2d 699 (1984)

If expenses would not be recoverable by Depart­ment of Justice, they are not made recoverable by billing them to an­oth­er agency. State v. Heston, 74 Or App 631, 704 P2d 541 (1985)

Law Review Cita­tions

11 WLJ 284, 288, 289, 291 (1975); 55 OLR 101 (1976)

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 433, 476, 489 (1972)

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.