2007 ORS 161.737¹
Sentence imposed on dangerous offender as departure from sentencing guidelines

(1) A sentence imposed under ORS 161.725 (Standards for sentencing of dangerous offenders) and 161.735 (Procedure for determining whether defendant dangerous) for felonies committed on or after November 1, 1989, shall constitute a departure from the sentencing guidelines created by rules of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission. The findings made to classify the defendant as a dangerous offender under ORS 161.725 (Standards for sentencing of dangerous offenders) and 161.735 (Procedure for determining whether defendant dangerous) shall constitute substantial and compelling reasons to depart from the presumptive sentence as provided by rules of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission.

(2) When the sentence is imposed, the sentencing judge shall indicate on the record the reasons for the departure and shall impose, in addition to the indeterminate sentence imposed under ORS 161.725 (Standards for sentencing of dangerous offenders), a required incarceration term that the offender must serve before release to post-prison supervision. If the presumptive sentence that would have been imposed if the court had not imposed the sentence under ORS 161.725 (Standards for sentencing of dangerous offenders) and 161.735 (Procedure for determining whether defendant dangerous) as a departure is a prison sentence, the required incarceration term shall be no less than the presumptive incarceration term and no more than twice the maximum presumptive incarceration term. If the presumptive sentence for the offense is probation, the required incarceration term shall be no less than the maximum incarceration term provided by the rule of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission that establishes incarceration terms for dispositional departures and no more than twice that amount. However, the indeterminate sentence imposed under this section and ORS 161.725 (Standards for sentencing of dangerous offenders) is not subject to any guideline rule establishing limitations on the duration of departures. [1989 c.790 §77; 1993 c.334 §6]

_______________

Notes of Decisions

Where presumptive sen­tence could be determined from the record, trial court complied with statutory require­ment to indicate presumptive sen­tence in written judg­ment. State v. Warren, 122 Or App 334, 857 P2d 876 (1993), Sup Ct review denied

Pre-1993 dangerous offender sen­tence is departure sen­tence within sen­ten­cing guide­lines. State v. Davis, 315 Or 484, 847 P2d 834 (1993). But see State v. Coburn, 146 Or App 653, 934 P2d 579 (1997)

Entire indeterminate term of pre-1993 dangerous offender statute is incarcera­tion term subject to limita­tions on consecutive sen­tences. State v. Davis, 315 Or 484, 847 P2d 834 (1993). But see State v. Coburn, 146 Or App 653, 934 P2d 579 (1997)

Where 30-year dangerous offender sen­tence exceeded prescribed statutory max­i­mum sen­tence, imposi­tion of dangerous offender sen­tence based on finding of fact by court violated defendant's federal constitu­tional right to have fact proved to jury beyond reasonable doubt. State v. Warren, 195 Or App 656, 98 P3d 1129 (2004), 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)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 161—General Provisions, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­161.­html (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 161, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­161ano.­htm (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
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.