133.605 Use of
force in executing warrants.
(1) The executing officer and other officers accompanying and assisting the
officer may use the degree of force, short of deadly physical force, against
persons, or to effect an entry, or to open containers, as is reasonably
necessary for the execution of the search warrant with all practicable safety.
(2) The use of
deadly physical force in the execution of a search warrant is justifiable only:
(a) If the
officer reasonably believes that there is a substantial risk that things to be
seized will be used to cause death or serious physical injury if their seizure
is delayed and that the force used creates no substantial risk of injury to
persons other than those obstructing the officer; or
(b) If the
officer reasonably believes that the use of deadly physical force is necessary
to defend the officer or another person from the use or threatened imminent use
of deadly physical force. [1973 c.836 §89]
133.610 [Amended by 1963 c.511 §1; 1965
c.508 §3; 1973 c.836 §138; renumbered 135.070]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases, 1991–2009 · leading case:
State v. Attaway, 870 P.2d 103 (N.M. 1994).
State v. Attaway, 870 P.2d 103 (N.M. 1994).
· cites it 2× “22, § 1228 (West 1991); Or.Rev.Stat. § 133.605 (1991); Rules Crim.”
State v. Hawkins, 201 P.3d 239 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 3× “As to defendant’s motion to suppress his inculpatory statements, the court concluded that defendant had been detained for safety reasons and that that detention was authorized by ORS 133.605(1). 3 The court also found that the statements had been lawfully obtained, explaining…”
State v. Reinhardt, 916 P.2d 313 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “605(1) provides: "The executing officer and other officers accompanying and assisting the officer may use the degree of force, short of deadly physical force, against persons, or to effect an entry, or to open containers, as is reasonably necessary for the execution of the…”
State v. Barnett, 888 P.2d 1064 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “605(5), because ORS 133.605, which governs the use of force by police during execution of a warrant, provides independent authority for officers to control persons present to the extent necessary to execute the warrant with all practicable safety.”
State v. Cawrse, 804 P.2d 513 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “ORS 133.605 2 authorizes officers to control persons present at a place where a search warrant is being executed to the extent necessary to execute the warrant with all practicable safety.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 133.605(1) — 4 cases
State v. Hawkins, 201 P.3d 239 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“As to defendant’s motion to suppress his inculpatory statements, the court concluded that defendant had been detained for safety reasons and that that detention was authorized by ORS 133.605(1). 3 The court also found that the statements had been lawfully obtained, explaining…”
State v. Reinhardt, 916 P.2d 313 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“605(1) provides: "The executing officer and other officers accompanying and assisting the officer may use the degree of force, short of deadly physical force, against persons, or to effect an entry, or to open containers, as is reasonably necessary for the execution of the…”
State v. Barnett, 888 P.2d 1064 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
“605(5), because ORS 133.605, which governs the use of force by police during execution of a warrant, provides independent authority for officers to control persons present to the extent necessary to execute the warrant with all practicable safety.”
State v. Cawrse, 804 P.2d 513 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
“ORS 133.605 2 authorizes officers to control persons present at a place where a search warrant is being executed to the extent necessary to execute the warrant with all practicable safety.”
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.