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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 153.108 (2026)

Effect of judgment

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

      153.108 Effect of judgment. (1) Notwithstanding ORS 131.505 to 131.535, if a person commits both a crime and a violation as part of the same criminal episode, the prosecution for one offense shall not bar the subsequent prosecution for the other. However, evidence of the first conviction shall not be admissible in any subsequent prosecution for the other offense.

      (2) Notwithstanding ORS 43.130 and 43.160, a plea, finding or judgment in a violation proceeding, or the fact that a violation proceeding has been brought against a defendant, may not be used for the purpose of res judicata or collateral estoppel, or be admitted as evidence in any civil proceeding. [1999 c.1051 §27; 2011 c.597 §29]

 

      153.110 [1981 c.692 §11; repealed by 1999 c.1051 §32]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2021 · leading case: State v. Warner, 112 P.3d 464 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Warner, 112 P.3d 464 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 19× “” 4 The state argues that the trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss on statutory grounds because ORS 153.108 expressly allows the state to prosecute defendant for the crimes of reckless driving and DUII notwithstanding the earlier prosecution for careless…”
State v. Warner, 153 P.3d 674 (Or. 2007). · cites it 25× “The principal issue in this case concerns the meaning and scope of ORS 153.108(1), 1 a statute that permits the state to prosecute separately a violation and a crime arising out of the same criminal episode, notwithstanding the general statutory prohibition on such prosecutions…”
State v. S.-Q. K. (In re S.-Q. K.), 426 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “108(1), proceedings in adult criminal court and other juvenile court adjudicatory proceedings based on an act alleged in a petition or citation to have been committed by a child, ward, youth or youth offender or allegations arising out of the same conduct are barred when the…”
State v. Page, 113 P.3d 447 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 11× “Defendant’s conviction established as a fact that he had committed a violation. Thus, for purposes of ORS 153.”
Washington Cnty. Police Officers' Ass'n v. Washington Cnty., 45 P.3d 515 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “260 (1997) (repealed and reenacted in 1999 as ORS 153.108) (If a person commits both a crime and a violation in the same criminal episode, prosecution for one does not bar subsequent prosecution of the other; however, evidence of the first "conviction” is not admissible in that…”
State v. G. E. S., 504 P.3d 61 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “190 provides: “Except as provided in ORS 153.108 (1), proceedings in adult criminal court and other juvenile court adjudicatory proceedings based on an act alleged in a petition or citation to have been committed by a child, ward, youth or youth offender or allegations arising…”
State v. M. B. (In re M. B.), 427 P.3d 1121 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “190 provides: "Except as provided in ORS 153.108(1), proceedings in adult criminal court and other juvenile court adjudicatory proceedings based on an act alleged in a petition or citation to have been committed by a child, ward, youth or youth offender or allegations arising…”
State v. Garnier, 16 P.3d 1175 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). “” Substantially similar provisions are now found in ORS 153.108. Defendant made no constitutional arguments to the trial court and has made no appearance on appeal.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 153.108(1) — 5 cases
State v. Warner, 153 P.3d 674 (Or. 2007). “The principal issue in this case concerns the meaning and scope of ORS 153.108(1), 1 a statute that permits the state to prosecute separately a violation and a crime arising out of the same criminal episode, notwithstanding the general statutory prohibition on such prosecutions…”
State v. Warner, 112 P.3d 464 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “” 4 The state argues that the trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion to dismiss on statutory grounds because ORS 153.108 expressly allows the state to prosecute defendant for the crimes of reckless driving and DUII notwithstanding the earlier prosecution for careless…”
State v. S.-Q. K. (In re S.-Q. K.), 426 P.3d 659 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “108(1), proceedings in adult criminal court and other juvenile court adjudicatory proceedings based on an act alleged in a petition or citation to have been committed by a child, ward, youth or youth offender or allegations arising out of the same conduct are barred when the…”
State v. Page, 113 P.3d 447 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “Defendant’s conviction established as a fact that he had committed a violation. Thus, for purposes of ORS 153.”
State v. M. B. (In re M. B.), 427 P.3d 1121 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “190 provides: "Except as provided in ORS 153.108(1), proceedings in adult criminal court and other juvenile court adjudicatory proceedings based on an act alleged in a petition or citation to have been committed by a child, ward, youth or youth offender or allegations arising…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 153.108(2) — 1 case
State v. Warner, 153 P.3d 674 (Or. 2007). “The principal issue in this case concerns the meaning and scope of ORS 153.108(1), 1 a statute that permits the state to prosecute separately a violation and a crime arising out of the same criminal episode, notwithstanding the general statutory prohibition on such prosecutions…”
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.