ORS 163.245¹
Custodial interference in the second degree

(1) A person commits the crime of custodial interference in the second degree if, knowing or having reason to know that the person has no legal right to do so, the person takes, entices or keeps another person from the other person’s lawful custodian or in violation of a valid joint custody order with intent to hold the other person permanently or for a protracted period.

(2) Expenses incurred by a lawful custodial parent or a parent enforcing a valid joint custody order in locating and regaining physical custody of the person taken, enticed or kept in violation of this section are "economic damages" for purposes of restitution under ORS 137.103 (Definitions for ORS 137.101 to 137.109) to 137.109 (Effect of restitution order on other remedies of victim).

(3) Custodial interference in the second degree is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §100; 1981 c.774 §1; 1987 c.795 §7; 2005 c.564 §6]

Notes of Decisions

Evidence was sufficient to show that defendant knew that he did not have con­sent to take children, and that he intended to keep children from their mother for a permanent or protracted period of time. State v. Dirks, 35 Or App 33, 581 P2d 85 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Person sixteen years of age or older and not suffering from physical or mental disability can be "enticed" within meaning of this sec­tion. State v. Scott, 36 Or App 15, 583 P2d 1156 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Whether per­son being taken has given con­sent is relevant only if defendant has not "enticed" such con­sent, and thus this sec­tion does not impose strict liability on defendant who aids per­son who is voluntarily fleeing from custodian. State v. Scott, 36 Or App 15, 583 P2d 1156 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Parent who knowingly takes child from lawful custody of CSD may commit custodial in­ter­fer­ence in sec­ond de­gree, even in absence of court order affecting parental rights. State v. Gambone, 93 Or App 569, 763 P2d 188 (1988)

Where parents share custody, existence of joint custody order is not re­quired for ac­tions of one parent to constitute infringe­ment on custody rights of other parent. State v. Fitouri, 133 Or App 672, 893 P2d 556 (1995)

Person may "keep" an­oth­er per­son from lawful custodian without restraining or otherwise exercising control over other per­son. State v. Adicho, 197 Or App 394, 105 P3d 916 (2005)

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 491 (1972)

Notes of Decisions

Trial court properly admitted two handguns found in defendant's pos­ses­sion shortly after alleged com­mis­sion of crimes of kidnapping and robbery, where crimes were committed with aid of a handgun. State v. Manning, 39 Or App 279, 591 P2d 1195 (1979)

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 428 (1972)

Chapter 163

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 427-637 (1972)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 163—Offenses Against Persons, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­163.­html (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 163, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­163ano.­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.
Currency Information