2007 ORS 163.355¹
Rape in the third degree

(1) A person commits the crime of rape in the third degree if the person has sexual intercourse with another person under 16 years of age.

(2) Rape in the third degree is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §109; 1991 c.628 §1]

Notes of Decisions

Fact that defendant's reasonable mis­take as to age of victim is no de­fense to charge of rape in the third de­gree, but is a de­fense to charge of rape in sec­ond or first de­gree, does not violate equal privileges require­ment of Oregon Constitu­tion. State v. Jalo, 72 Or App 479, 696 P2d 14 (1985), Sup Ct review denied

ORS 161.062 was not violated where defendant received six separate con­vic­­tions and sen­tences for one count each of first and third de­gree rape and two counts each of first and third de­gree sodomy because each of first de­gree crimes of which defendant was convicted re­quired proof of ele­ment not necessary to prove corresponding third de­gree crime and legislature addressed distinct social concern in enacting each of statutory alternatives on which defendant was convicted. State v. Crotsley, 308 Or 272, 779 P2d 600 (1989)

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statutes

Person to whom complaint of sexual miscon­duct was made by prosecuting witness could testify that complaint was made, but could not testify as to details of complaint. State v. Waites, 7 Or App 137, 490 P2d 188 (1971)

There was no rule in this state that either re­quired or prohibited a cau­tionary instruc­tion concerning the victim's credibility. State v. Stocker, 11 Or App 617, 503 P2d 501 (1972), Sup Ct review denied

This sec­tion does not violate equal protec­tion pro­vi­sion of state and federal constitu­tions. State v. Elmore, 24 Or App 651, 546 P2d 1117 (1976)

In General

Indict­ments charging defendants with forcible "sexual intercourse with...a female" were sufficient, notwithstanding that indict­ments did not allege that defendants were males. State v. Routh/Hawkins, 30 Or App 901, 568 P2d 704 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Completed Cita­tions

State v. Hamilton, 5 Or App 266, 483 P2d 90 (1971), Sup Ct review denied

Law Review Cita­tions

In General

19 WLR 489 (1983)

Notes of Decisions

Under evidence that defendant inten­tionally touched victim's buttocks through clothing, whether such con­duct constituted "sexual contact" of victim's "intimate parts" was ques­tion for jury. State v. Buller, 31 Or App 889, 581 P2d 1263 (1977)

Genitalia and breasts are intimate parts as matter of law under this sec­tion, and undeveloped genitalia and breasts of children are included within defini­tion. State v. Turner, 33 Or App 157, 575 P2d 1007 (1978), Sup Ct review denied

Rule that state is not permitted to introduce evidence of other crimes or bad acts solely to prove defendant acted as on prior occasions is strictly applied in sex crime cases, even those involving deviate sexual behavior, in so far as con­duct with per­sons other than victim is concerned. State v. Sicks, 33 Or App 435, 576 P2d 834 (1978)

Law Review Cita­tions

51 OLR 428, 518-522, 555 (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.