2017 ORS 221.360¹
Appeal on issue of constitutionality of charter provision or ordinance

In all cases involving the constitutionality of the charter provision or ordinance under which the conviction was obtained as indicated in ORS 221.359 (Appeals from conviction in municipal court), such person shall have the right of appeal to the circuit court in the manner provided in ORS 221.359 (Appeals from conviction in municipal court), regardless of any charter provision or ordinance prohibiting appeals from the municipal court because of the amount of the penalty or otherwise. An appeal may likewise be taken in such cases from the judgment or final order of the circuit court to the Court of Appeals in the same manner as other appeals are taken from the circuit court to the Court of Appeals in other criminal cases. Where the right of appeal in such cases depends upon there being involved an issue as to the constitutionality of the charter provision or ordinance, the decision of the appellate court shall be upon such constitutional issue only. [Amended by 1969 c.198 §78; 1985 c.342 §17]

Notes of Decisions

Scope of appellate court review of district court con­vic­­tions of ordinance viola­tions is equivalent to that available to per­sons ap­pealing from district court con­vic­­tions of state of­fenses. City of Portland v. Poindexter, 38 Or App 551, 590 P2d 781 (1979)

Provisions of this sec­tion, which limit ap­peals from circuit review of municipal court con­vic­­tions to ques­tions of constitu­tionality of ordinances or charter pro­vi­sions, do not violate United States or Oregon Constitu­tions. City of Klamath Falls v. Winters, 289 Or 757, 619 P2d 217 (1980)

Court of Appeals has jurisdic­tion where defendant challenges pro­vi­sion that is inseparable from pro­vi­sion under which defendant was convicted. City of Eugene v. Miller, 119 Or App 293, 851 P2d 1142 (1993), aff’d on other grounds, 318 Or 480, 871 P2d 454 (1994)

For purposes of right to ap­peal, issue as to constitu­tionality of charter pro­vi­sion or ordinance may be raised as either facial or as-applied challenge. City of Eugene v. Lincoln, 183 Or App 36, 50 P3d 1253 (2002)

Limita­tion on scope of decision by appellate court re­gard­ing constitu­tional issue applies only to municipal court con­vic­­tion for which city ordinance otherwise prohibits ap­peal. City of Eugene v. Lincoln, 183 Or App 36, 50 P3d 1253 (2002)

Once appellant meets prerequisite of raising cognizable facial or as-applied challenge to constitu­tionality of ordinance, appellate court may address both constitu­tional and nonconstitu­tional conten­tions. City of Lowell v. Wilson, 197 Or App 291, 105 P3d 856 (2005), Sup Ct review denied

Completed Cita­tions

Portland v. Olson, 4 Or App 380, 481 P2d 641 (1971), Sup Ct review denied

Notes of Decisions

Person who is convicted in municipal court and ap­peals that con­vic­­tion to circuit court, pursuant to these sec­tions, may ap­peal adverse decision of circuit court to Court of Appeals only if case involves constitu­tionality of ordinance under which defendant was convicted. City of Lincoln City v. Pennington, 91 Or App 713, 756 P2d 75 (1988)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 221—Organization and Government of Cities, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors221.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 221, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano221.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
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.