2015 ORS 167.222¹
Frequenting a place where controlled substances are used

(1) A person commits the offense of frequenting a place where controlled substances are used if the person keeps, maintains, frequents, or remains at a place, while knowingly permitting persons to use controlled substances in such place or to keep or sell them in violation of ORS 475.005 (Definitions for ORS 475.005 to 475.285 and 475.752 to 475.980) to 475.285 (Short title) and 475.752 (Prohibited acts generally) to 475.980 (Affirmative defense to ORS 475.969, 475.971, 475.975 (1) and 475.976 (1)).

(2) Frequenting a place where controlled substances are used is a Class A misdemeanor.

(3) Notwithstanding subsection (2) of this section, if the conviction is for knowingly maintaining, frequenting or remaining at a place where less than one avoirdupois ounce of the dried leaves, stems, and flowers of the plant Cannabis family Moraceae is found at the time of the offense under this section, frequenting a place where controlled substances are used is a Class D violation.

(4) As used in this section, "frequents" means repeatedly or habitually visits, goes to or resorts to. [1971 c.743 §277; 1974 c.43 §1; 1977 c.745 §35; 1979 c.641 §1; 1991 c.67 §41; 1993 c.469 §3; 1995 c.440 §16; 1999 c.1051 §160]

Notes of Decisions

Evidence that defendant entered residence five minutes before police arrived, for purpose of negotiating repair of car, that large quantity of hashish was contained in covered boxes on table within residence, and that defendant suspected that plastic bag on table did contain drugs, was insufficient to show that defendant knowingly remained in a place resorted to by drug users. State v. West, 31 Or App 1177, 572 P2d 349 (1977)

This sec­tion, in prohibiting "frequenting a place where controlled substances are used" is not unconstitu­tionally vague under U.S. or Oregon Constitu­tion. State v. Pyritz, 90 Or App 601, 752 P2d 1310 (1988)

Evidence that defendant was asleep in his underwear on sec­ond floor of house, that house was heavily fortified, that drugs had been sold in house and that an­oth­er per­son was found flushing drugs down toilet on first floor while defendant slept upstairs constituted probable cause that defendant remained in house and permitted drug use on premises within meaning of this sec­tion. State v. Anderson, 95 Or App 178, 768 P2d 427 (1989)

Frequenting place where controlled substances are used is not lesser included of­fense of unlawful pos­ses­sion of controlled substance. State v. Martz, 103 Or App 105, 795 P2d 616 (1990)

Chapter 167

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Exemp­tion of nuisance laws from constitu­tional require­ment for pay­ments based on govern­ment regula­tions restricting use of prop­erty, (2001) Vol 49, p 284

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 427-637 (1972)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 167—Offenses Against General Welfare and Animals, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors167.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 167, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano167.­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.