Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125 (2026)

Time limitations

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      131.125 Time limitations. (1) A prosecution for aggravated murder, murder, attempted murder or aggravated murder, conspiracy or solicitation to commit aggravated murder or murder or any degree of manslaughter may be commenced at any time after the commission of the attempt, conspiracy or solicitation to commit aggravated murder or murder, or the death of the person killed.

      (2) A prosecution for any of the following felonies may be commenced within 20 years after the commission of the crime or, if the victim at the time of the crime was under 18 years of age, anytime before the victim attains 30 years of age, whichever occurs later:

      (a) Rape in the first degree under ORS 163.375.

      (b) Sodomy in the first degree under ORS 163.405.

      (c) Unlawful sexual penetration in the first degree under ORS 163.411.

      (d) Sexual abuse in the first degree under ORS 163.427.

      (3) A prosecution for any of the following felonies may be commenced within six years after the commission of the crime or, if the victim at the time of the crime was under 18 years of age, anytime before the victim attains 30 years of age or within 12 years after the offense is reported to a law enforcement agency or the Department of Human Services, whichever occurs first:

      (a) Strangulation under ORS 163.187 (4).

      (b) Criminal mistreatment in the first degree under ORS 163.205.

      (c) Rape in the third degree under ORS 163.355.

      (d) Rape in the second degree under ORS 163.365.

      (e) Sodomy in the third degree under ORS 163.385.

      (f) Sodomy in the second degree under ORS 163.395.

      (g) Unlawful sexual penetration in the second degree under ORS 163.408.

      (h) Sexual abuse in the second degree under ORS 163.425.

      (i) Using a child in a display of sexual conduct under ORS 163.670.

      (j) Encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree under ORS 163.684.

      (k) Incest under ORS 163.525.

      (L) Promoting prostitution under ORS 167.012.

      (m) Compelling prostitution under ORS 167.017.

      (n) Luring a minor under ORS 167.057.

      (4) A prosecution for any of the following misdemeanors may be commenced within four years after the commission of the crime or, if the victim at the time of the crime was under 18 years of age, anytime before the victim attains 22 years of age or within four years after the offense is reported to a law enforcement agency or the Department of Human Services, whichever occurs first:

      (a) Strangulation under ORS 163.187 (3).

      (b) Sexual abuse in the third degree under ORS 163.415.

      (c) Exhibiting an obscene performance to a minor under ORS 167.075.

      (d) Displaying obscene materials to minors under ORS 167.080.

      (5) In the case of crimes described in subsection (3)(i) of this section, the victim is the child engaged in sexual conduct. In the case of the crime described in subsection (3)(k) of this section, the victim is the party to the incest other than the party being prosecuted. In the case of crimes described in subsection (3)(L) and (m) of this section, the victim is the child whose acts of prostitution are promoted or compelled.

      (6) A prosecution for arson in any degree may be commenced within six years after the commission of the crime.

      (7) A prosecution for any of the following felonies may be commenced within six years after the commission of the crime if the victim at the time of the crime was 65 years of age or older:

      (a) Theft in the first degree under ORS 164.055.

      (b) Aggravated theft in the first degree under ORS 164.057.

      (c) Extortion under ORS 164.075.

      (d) Robbery in the third degree under ORS 164.395.

      (e) Robbery in the second degree under ORS 164.405.

      (f) Robbery in the first degree under ORS 164.415.

      (g) Forgery in the first degree under ORS 165.013.

      (h) Fraudulent use of a credit card under ORS 165.055 (4)(b).

      (i) Identity theft under ORS 165.800.

      (8) Except as provided in subsection (9) of this section or as otherwise expressly provided by law, prosecutions for other offenses must be commenced within the following periods of limitations after their commission:

      (a) For any other felony, three years.

      (b) For any misdemeanor, two years.

      (c) For a violation, six months.

      (9) If the period prescribed in subsection (8) of this section has expired, a prosecution nevertheless may be commenced as follows:

      (a) If the offense has as a material element either fraud or the breach of a fiduciary obligation, prosecution may be commenced within one year after discovery of the offense by an aggrieved party or by a person who has a legal duty to represent an aggrieved party and who is not a party to the offense, but in no case shall the period of limitation otherwise applicable be extended by more than three years;

      (b) If the offense is based upon misconduct in office by a public officer or employee, prosecution may be commenced at any time while the defendant is in public office or employment or within two years thereafter, but in no case shall the period of limitation otherwise applicable be extended by more than three years;

      (c) If the offense is an invasion of personal privacy under ORS 163.700 or 163.701, prosecution may be commenced within one year after discovery of the offense by the person aggrieved by the offense, by a person who has a legal duty to represent the person aggrieved by the offense or by a law enforcement agency, but in no case shall the period of limitation otherwise applicable be extended by more than three years; or

      (d) If the offense is sexual abuse by fraudulent representation under ORS 163.429, prosecution may be commenced within six years after the victim becomes aware or reasonably should have become aware of the criminal nature of the conduct.

      (10) Notwithstanding subsections (2) and (3) of this section, if the defendant is identified after the period described in subsection (2) or (3) of this section on the basis of DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) sample comparisons, a prosecution for:

      (a) Rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, unlawful sexual penetration in the first degree or sexual abuse in the first degree may be commenced at any time after the commission of the crime.

      (b) Rape in the second degree, sodomy in the second degree or unlawful sexual penetration in the second degree may be commenced within 25 years after the commission of the crime.

      (11) Notwithstanding subsection (10) of this section, if a prosecution for a felony listed in subsection (10) of this section would otherwise be barred by subsection (2) or (3) of this section, the prosecution must be commenced within two years of the DNA-based identification of the defendant.

      (12)(a) Notwithstanding subsection (2) of this section, if a prosecuting attorney obtains corroborating evidence of the crimes of rape in the first degree, sodomy in the first degree, unlawful sexual penetration in the first degree or sexual abuse in the first degree, after the period described in subsection (2) of this section, the prosecution may be commenced at any time after the commission of the crime.

      (b) The corroborating evidence described in paragraph (a) of this subsection must consist of one of the following:

      (A) Physical evidence other than a DNA sample, including but not limited to audio, video or other electronic recordings, text messages, guest book logs, telephone recordings and photographs.

      (B) A confession, made by the defendant, to the crime the victim reported.

      (C) An oral statement, made by the victim to another person in temporal proximity to the commission of the crime, corroborating the victim’s report of the crime to a law enforcement agency.

      (D) A written statement, created by the victim in temporal proximity to the commission of the crime and subsequently delivered to another person or to a law enforcement agency, corroborating the victim’s report of the crime to a law enforcement agency.

      (E) A report made by a different victim to a law enforcement agency, made either before or after the victim’s report, alleging that the defendant committed another crime of the same or similar character such that the two crimes could be charged in the same charging instrument under ORS 132.560.

      (13)(a) A prosecuting attorney commencing a prosecution pursuant to subsection (12) of this section shall present any evidence reasonably tending to negate the guilt of the defendant to the grand jury considering the indictment for the offense.

      (b) The failure to present evidence reasonably tending to negate guilt as required by paragraph (a) of this subsection does not affect the validity of an indictment or prosecution. [1973 c.836 §6; 1989 c.831 §1; 1991 c.386 §5; 1991 c.388 §1; 1991 c.830 §5; 1995 c.768 §8; 1997 c.427 §1; 1997 c.697 §3; 1997 c.850 §5; 2001 c.375 §1; 2005 c.252 §1; 2005 c.839 §1; 2007 c.840 §1; 2007 c.869 §6; 2009 c.585 §1; 2011 c.666 §2; 2011 c.681 §3; 2012 c.70 §2; 2015 c.417 §1; 2015 c.645 §5; 2016 c.47 §5; 2016 c.120 §1; 2023 c.200 §2; 2023 c.265 §1]

 

      Note: Section 2, chapter 265, Oregon Laws 2023, provides:

      Sec. 2. The amendments to ORS 131.125 by section 1 of this 2023 Act apply to offenses committed before, on or after the effective date of this 2023 Act [January 1, 2024] but do not operate to revive a prosecution barred by the operation of ORS 131.125 before the effective date of this 2023 Act. [2023 c.265 §2]

 

      131.130 [Repealed by 1973 c.836 §358]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 111 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: State v. Cookman, 920 P.2d 1086 (Or. 1996).
State v. Cookman, 920 P.2d 1086 (Or. 1996). · cites it 40× “[1] *1088 Specifically, defendant argued that his prosecution was barred by the three-year statute of limitations that was in effect when he allegedly committed the crimes, ORS 131.125 (1985). After that three-year period had expired, the legislature amended ORS 131.”
State v. Cookman, 873 P.2d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 24× “[2] The legislature expressly declared that it intended the six-year limitation to apply to crimes committed before the effective date of the amendment: "The amendments to ORS 131.125 by section 1 of this Act apply to all causes of action whether arising before, on or after the…”
State v. Walker, 86 P.3d 690 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 17× “The purpose of the amendment was to address the fact that “[i]n sexually related offenses, a child may be too young to understand that sexual activity is a reportable offense, too intimidated to report, or simply unable to report outside the family unit.”
Lamb v. Coursey, 243 P.3d 130 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 25× “125(6). In that light, we find significant that, when the legislature wants to refer to an attempt offense, it does so by the employment of statutory wording that readily reflects that desire.”
State v. Tannehill, 141 P.3d 584 (Or. 2006). · cites it 13× “ORS 131.125 (2001) 1 sets out the limitation periods within which the state may commence criminal prosecutions.”
State v. Sperou, 442 P.3d 581 (Or. 2019). · cites it 2× “See former ORS 131.125(2) (2013), amended by Or. Laws 2015, ch.”
Abbott v. Baldwin, 36 P.3d 516 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 6× “105 provides that “[a] criminal action must be commenced within the period of limitation prescribed in ORS 131.125 to 131.155.” An examination of ORS 131.”
State v. Eladem, 414 P.3d 426 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 13× “Defendant's first assignment of error raises the issue of whether the statute of limitations in ORS 131.125(2) (2013), amended by Or. Laws 2015, ch.”
State v. Harberts, 108 P.3d 1201 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 9× “According to defendant, “[u]nder the 1989 version of ORS 131.125, [defendant] could be charged and convicted only if the evidence showed that his offense occurred within three years of the date of the commission of the offense.”
State v. Sauls, 106 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 12× “n for any of the following misdemeanors may be commenced within four years after the commission of the crime or, if the victim at the time of the crime was under 18 years of age, anytime before the victim attains 22 years of age or within four years after the offense is reported…”
State v. Wimber, 843 P.2d 424 (Or. 1992). · cites it 4× “ORS 131.125 (1987). ORS 131.125 was amended in 1989 to provide a six-year statute of limitations for rape, sodomy, sexual abuse, and similar offenses "if the victim, at the time of the crime, was under 18 years of age.”
Hall v. Lampert, 100 P.3d 1138 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 13× “After his conviction on all charges, he sought post-conviction relief, claiming that his counsel was constitutionally inadequate for failing to move to dismiss four of the charges on grounds that they were barred by a six-year statute of limitations, pursuant to ORS 131.125(2).…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(1) — 4 cases
Lamb v. Coursey, 243 P.3d 130 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “125(6). In that light, we find significant that, when the legislature wants to refer to an attempt offense, it does so by the employment of statutory wording that readily reflects that desire.”
State v. Wendt, 341 P.3d 893 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Anthony, 228 P.3d 1222 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
State v. Roberts, 374 Or. 821 (Or. 2026).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2) — 26 cases
State v. Walker, 86 P.3d 690 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “The purpose of the amendment was to address the fact that “[i]n sexually related offenses, a child may be too young to understand that sexual activity is a reportable offense, too intimidated to report, or simply unable to report outside the family unit.”
State v. Cookman, 873 P.2d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “[2] The legislature expressly declared that it intended the six-year limitation to apply to crimes committed before the effective date of the amendment: "The amendments to ORS 131.125 by section 1 of this Act apply to all causes of action whether arising before, on or after the…”
State v. Sperou, 442 P.3d 581 (Or. 2019). “See former ORS 131.125(2) (2013), amended by Or. Laws 2015, ch.”
State v. Eladem, 414 P.3d 426 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “Defendant's first assignment of error raises the issue of whether the statute of limitations in ORS 131.125(2) (2013), amended by Or. Laws 2015, ch.”
Hall v. Lampert, 100 P.3d 1138 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “After his conviction on all charges, he sought post-conviction relief, claiming that his counsel was constitutionally inadequate for failing to move to dismiss four of the charges on grounds that they were barred by a six-year statute of limitations, pursuant to ORS 131.125(2).…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2)(a) — 13 cases
State v. Cookman, 920 P.2d 1086 (Or. 1996). “[1] *1088 Specifically, defendant argued that his prosecution was barred by the three-year statute of limitations that was in effect when he allegedly committed the crimes, ORS 131.125 (1985). After that three-year period had expired, the legislature amended ORS 131.”
Springer v. State, 621 P.2d 1213 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
State v. Harberts, 108 P.3d 1201 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “According to defendant, “[u]nder the 1989 version of ORS 131.125, [defendant] could be charged and convicted only if the evidence showed that his offense occurred within three years of the date of the commission of the offense.”
State v. Barnes, 676 P.2d 344 (Or. Ct. App. 1984).
State v. Pirouzkar, 780 P.2d 802 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Emery, 869 P.2d 859 (Or. 1994).
State v. Dufort, 827 P.2d 192 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
Oregon State Bar v. Wright, 785 P.2d 340 (Or. 1990).
State v. Scott, 617 P.2d 681 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2)(c) — 2 cases
Oregon State Bar v. Wright, 785 P.2d 340 (Or. 1990).
Oregon State Bar v. Wright, 772 P.2d 1366 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2)(d) — 3 cases
Lamb v. Coursey, 243 P.3d 130 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “125(6). In that light, we find significant that, when the legislature wants to refer to an attempt offense, it does so by the employment of statutory wording that readily reflects that desire.”
State v. Sharp, 949 P.2d 1230 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Erickson v. Courtney (D. Or. 2020).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2)(g) — 1 case
State v. Walker, 86 P.3d 690 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “The purpose of the amendment was to address the fact that “[i]n sexually related offenses, a child may be too young to understand that sexual activity is a reportable offense, too intimidated to report, or simply unable to report outside the family unit.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2)(j) — 1 case
Abbott v. Baldwin, 36 P.3d 516 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “105 provides that “[a] criminal action must be commenced within the period of limitation prescribed in ORS 131.125 to 131.155.” An examination of ORS 131.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(2)(k) — 3 cases
State v. Harberts, 108 P.3d 1201 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “According to defendant, “[u]nder the 1989 version of ORS 131.125, [defendant] could be charged and convicted only if the evidence showed that his offense occurred within three years of the date of the commission of the offense.”
Abbott v. Baldwin, 36 P.3d 516 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “105 provides that “[a] criminal action must be commenced within the period of limitation prescribed in ORS 131.125 to 131.155.” An examination of ORS 131.”
State v. Parker, 849 P.2d 1157 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(3) — 5 cases
State v. Sauls, 106 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “n for any of the following misdemeanors may be commenced within four years after the commission of the crime or, if the victim at the time of the crime was under 18 years of age, anytime before the victim attains 22 years of age or within four years after the offense is reported…”
State v. Tannehill, 141 P.3d 584 (Or. 2006). “ORS 131.125 (2001) 1 sets out the limitation periods within which the state may commence criminal prosecutions.”
State v. Knutson, 725 P.2d 407 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
State v. Roberts, 374 Or. 821 (Or. 2026).
State v. Gray, 543 P.2d 316 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(3)(a) — 4 cases
State v. Sauls, 106 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “n for any of the following misdemeanors may be commenced within four years after the commission of the crime or, if the victim at the time of the crime was under 18 years of age, anytime before the victim attains 22 years of age or within four years after the offense is reported…”
State v. Tannehill, 141 P.3d 584 (Or. 2006). “ORS 131.125 (2001) 1 sets out the limitation periods within which the state may commence criminal prosecutions.”
State v. Dufort, 827 P.2d 192 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Mills, 711 P.2d 207 (Or. Ct. App. 1985).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(4) — 1 case
State v. Roberts, 374 Or. 821 (Or. 2026).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(5) — 1 case
State v. Ricker, 810 P.2d 1356 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(5)(a) — 4 cases
State v. Chinn, 840 P.2d 92 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Harelson, 938 P.2d 763 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Chatfield, 939 P.2d 55 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Sharp, 949 P.2d 1230 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(5)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Emery, 869 P.2d 859 (Or. 1994).
Oregon State Bar v. Wright, 785 P.2d 340 (Or. 1990).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(5)(c) — 1 case
State v. Hunt, 985 P.2d 832 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(6) — 10 cases
Lamb v. Coursey, 243 P.3d 130 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “125(6). In that light, we find significant that, when the legislature wants to refer to an attempt offense, it does so by the employment of statutory wording that readily reflects that desire.”
State v. Davids, 90 P.3d 1 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
State v. Ayers, 143 P.3d 251 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
State v. Loza, 260 P.3d 555 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
State v. Huskey, 17 P.3d 541 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(6)(a) — 11 cases
State v. Myers, 202 P.3d 238 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
State v. Washington, 337 P.3d 859 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Bigelow, 106 P.3d 162 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Ricker, 810 P.2d 1356 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
State v. Forsyth, 188 P.3d 299 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(6)(b) — 14 cases
State v. Adams, 116 P.3d 898 (Or. 2005).
State v. Garcia, 142 P.3d 501 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
State v. Caldwell, 69 P.3d 830 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
State v. Coulson, 258 P.3d 1253 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
State v. Huskey, 17 P.3d 541 (Or. Ct. App. 2000).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(7) — 3 cases
State v. Tannehill, 141 P.3d 584 (Or. 2006). “ORS 131.125 (2001) 1 sets out the limitation periods within which the state may commence criminal prosecutions.”
State v. Nistler, 342 P.3d 1035 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Hunter, 308 P.3d 266 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(7)(a) — 4 cases
State v. Wendt, 341 P.3d 893 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Hawkins, 323 P.3d 463 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Coburn, 292 P.3d 640 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
Monfore v. Persson, 439 P.3d 519 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(7)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Tannehill, 141 P.3d 584 (Or. 2006). “ORS 131.125 (2001) 1 sets out the limitation periods within which the state may commence criminal prosecutions.”
State v. Wendt, 341 P.3d 893 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(8) — 5 cases
State v. Nistler, 342 P.3d 1035 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Moore, 510 P.3d 907 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
State v. Roberts, 374 Or. 821 (Or. 2026).
State v. Hunter, 308 P.3d 266 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
State v. McMillan, 429 P.3d 746 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(8)(a) — 6 cases
State v. Gray, 401 P.3d 1241 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Nistler, 342 P.3d 1035 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Chase, 506 P.3d 443 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
State v. Roberts, 374 Or. 821 (Or. 2026).
State v. Hunter, 308 P.3d 266 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(8)(b) — 1 case
State v. Melecio, 507 P.3d 764 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(9)(a) — 1 case
Monfore v. Persson, 439 P.3d 519 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.125(k) — 1 case
State v. Sharp, 949 P.2d 1230 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.