Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.625 (2026)

Frisk of stopped persons

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

      131.625 Frisk of stopped persons. (1) A peace officer may frisk a stopped person for dangerous or deadly weapons if the officer reasonably suspects that the person is armed and dangerous to the officer or other persons present.

      (2) If, in the course of the frisk, the peace officer feels an object which the peace officer reasonably suspects is a dangerous or deadly weapon, the peace officer may take such action as is reasonably necessary to take possession of the weapon. [1973 c.836 §32; 1997 c.866 §3]

 

(Detention)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1975–2026 · leading case: State v. Rickard, 947 P.2d 215 (Or. Ct. App. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rickard, 947 P.2d 215 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 16× “615 and ORS 131.625, to stop and frisk him for a weapon, and that they violated his rights under Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution when they stopped him and searched his pockets.”
State v. Blevins, 920 P.2d 1131 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 24× “605 to ORS 131.625, the stop and frisk statutes.”
State v. Lumpkin, 880 P.2d 468 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 79× “Defendant next argues that the frisk for weapons was not justified under ORS 131.625. ORS 131.625(1), which is part of Oregon's "stop and frisk" law, allows a peace officer to conduct an external patting of a stopped person's outer clothing "if the officer reasonably suspects…”
State v. Greene, 591 P.2d 1362 (Or. 1979). · cites it 5× “247 (search of conveyances on knowledge or information that they are being used to transport narcotics illegally and seizure of drugs and conveyance if drugs are found); ORS 471.”
State v. Baldwin, 712 P.2d 120 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 10× “The state's primary arguments in support of the search are that it was a legal statutory frisk for weapons under ORS 131.625 and that, if it was not a statutory frisk, it was proper for Igo to search for and seize the knife to protect himself during the time necessary to issue…”
State v. Johnson, 851 P.2d 1160 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 7× “ORS 131.625 authorized Rhodes to frisk Eugene and to take whatever steps were reasonably necessary to remove an object that felt like a weapon.”
State v. Bowen, 746 P.2d 249 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 14× “The authority of ORS 131.625 to frisk the stopped person for weapons is not authority for a general search of the person.”
State v. Davis, 666 P.2d 802 (Or. 1983). · cites it 2× “" ORS 131.625(1) provides: "A peace officer may frisk a stopped person for dangerous or deadly weapons if the officer reasonably suspects that the person is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or other person present.”
State v. Rudder, 217 P.3d 1064 (Or. 2009). · cites it 3× “The same statute, ORS 131.625, allows a police officer who feels what the officer reasonably suspects is a weapon in the course of such a frisk to “take such action as is reasonably necessary to take possession of the weapon,” including, it would seem, proceeding to a more…”
State v. Rodriguez, 854 P.2d 399 (Or. 1993). · cites it 2× “605 to ORS 131.625 (relating to stopping of persons) or Article I, section 9, of the Oregon Constitution.”
State v. Toevs, 964 P.2d 1007 (Or. 1998). · cites it 2× “605 to ORS 131.625, which also are part of the criminal procedure code, provide definitions and set forth the authority of a peace officer to stop, detain, and frisk a person in contexts other than a traffic stop.”
State v. Ehly, 854 P.2d 421 (Or. 1993). “Defendant has never argued that the search of the gym bag was unlawful under ORS 131.625(1), because a “frisk” is “an external patting of a person’s outer clothing,” ORS 131.”
Show all 64 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.625(1) — 29 cases
State v. Davis, 666 P.2d 802 (Or. 1983). “" ORS 131.625(1) provides: "A peace officer may frisk a stopped person for dangerous or deadly weapons if the officer reasonably suspects that the person is armed and presently dangerous to the officer or other person present.”
State v. Baldwin, 712 P.2d 120 (Or. Ct. App. 1985). “The state's primary arguments in support of the search are that it was a legal statutory frisk for weapons under ORS 131.625 and that, if it was not a statutory frisk, it was proper for Igo to search for and seize the knife to protect himself during the time necessary to issue…”
State v. Bowen, 746 P.2d 249 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “The authority of ORS 131.625 to frisk the stopped person for weapons is not authority for a general search of the person.”
State v. Ehly, 854 P.2d 421 (Or. 1993). “Defendant has never argued that the search of the gym bag was unlawful under ORS 131.625(1), because a “frisk” is “an external patting of a person’s outer clothing,” ORS 131.”
State v. Stanley, 912 P.2d 948 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 131.625(2) — 7 cases
State v. Lumpkin, 880 P.2d 468 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “Defendant next argues that the frisk for weapons was not justified under ORS 131.625. ORS 131.625(1), which is part of Oregon's "stop and frisk" law, allows a peace officer to conduct an external patting of a stopped person's outer clothing "if the officer reasonably suspects…”
State v. Blevins, 920 P.2d 1131 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “605 to ORS 131.625, the stop and frisk statutes.”
State v. Kurtz, 612 P.2d 749 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
State v. Bowen, 746 P.2d 249 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “The authority of ORS 131.625 to frisk the stopped person for weapons is not authority for a general search of the person.”
State v. Lumpkin, 891 P.2d 660 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
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.