Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.095

Requirements for criminal liability

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      161.095 Requirements for criminal liability. (1) The minimal requirement for criminal liability is the performance by a person of conduct which includes a voluntary act or the omission to perform an act which the person is capable of performing.

      (2) Except as provided in ORS 161.105, a person is not guilty of an offense unless the person acts with a culpable mental state with respect to each material element of the offense that necessarily requires a culpable mental state. [1971 c.743 §8]

 

      161.100 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 149 cases (39 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: State v. Owen
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Owen (2022) or · cites it 25× “085, and describes “when a culpable mental state must be proved, ORS 161.095, ORS 161.115, and ORS 161.105.”
State v. Shedrick (2022) or · cites it 16× “The parties contest whether the state had to prove any culpable mental state for the property-value element by initially focusing on the meaning of one of those general culpability statutes, ORS 161.095(2). That statute provides 260 State v.”
State v. Newman (2013) or · cites it 29× “” Defendant argued that evidence of his sleepwalking was relevant to negate the requirements for criminal liability under ORS 161.095 — specifically, proof of a voluntary act with respect to the driving element of DUII.”
State v. Tippetts (2002) orctapp · cites it 19× “The text of ORS 161.095 does not resolve the parties’ debate.”
State v. Prophet (2022) orctapp · cites it 10× “Looking for the first time to the legisla- tive history of ORS 161.095, we explained that the drafters intended the phrase “material element of the offense that necessarily requires a culpable mental state” to encompass all elements “that are relevant to the harm or evil…”
State v. Buttrey (1982) or · cites it 16× “085, and describing when a culpable mental state must be proved, ORS 161.095, ORS 161.115, and ORS 161.105.”
State v. Miller (1990) or · cites it 12× “105 provides in pertinent part: "(1) Notwithstanding ORS 161.095, a culpable mental state is not required if: "* * * * * "(b) An offense defined by a statute outside the Oregon Criminal Code clearly indicates a legislative intent to dispense with any culpable mental state…”
State v. Simonov (2016) or · cites it 4× “The exception to which ORS 161.095 refers provides, in part: “Notwithstanding ORS 161.”
State v. Olive (2013) orctapp · cites it 13× “Defendant argues that, under ORS 161.095(2), as construed in our opinion in State v.”
State v. Cervantes (2009) orctapp · cites it 10× “" The court went on to note that crimes require a "voluntary act," ORS 161.095, that neither former ORS 475.”
State v. Jones (2008) orctapp · cites it 6× “105 provides, in part: “(1) Notwithstanding ORS 161.095, a culpable mental state is not required if: ****** “(b) An offense defined by a statute outside the Oregon Criminal Code clearly indicates a legislative intent to dispense with any culpable mental state requirement for the…”
State v. Rainoldi (2011) or · cites it 5× “” The exception to which ORS 161.095 refers provides, in part: “Notwithstanding ORS 161.”
Show all 149 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.095(1) — 25 cases
State v. Tippetts (2002) orctapp “The text of ORS 161.095 does not resolve the parties’ debate.”
State v. Newman (2013) or “” Defendant argued that evidence of his sleepwalking was relevant to negate the requirements for criminal liability under ORS 161.095 — specifically, proof of a voluntary act with respect to the driving element of DUII.”
State v. Cervantes (2009) orctapp “" The court went on to note that crimes require a "voluntary act," ORS 161.095, that neither former ORS 475.”
City of Eugene v. Smyth (2010) orctapp
State v. Simonov (2016) or “The exception to which ORS 161.095 refers provides, in part: “Notwithstanding ORS 161.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.095(2) — 104 cases
State v. Owen (2022) or “085, and describes “when a culpable mental state must be proved, ORS 161.095, ORS 161.115, and ORS 161.105.”
State v. Shedrick (2022) or “The parties contest whether the state had to prove any culpable mental state for the property-value element by initially focusing on the meaning of one of those general culpability statutes, ORS 161.095(2). That statute provides 260 State v.”
State v. Prophet (2022) orctapp “Looking for the first time to the legisla- tive history of ORS 161.095, we explained that the drafters intended the phrase “material element of the offense that necessarily requires a culpable mental state” to encompass all elements “that are relevant to the harm or evil…”
State v. Olive (2013) orctapp “Defendant argues that, under ORS 161.095(2), as construed in our opinion in State v.”
State v. Buttrey (1982) or “085, and describing when a culpable mental state must be proved, ORS 161.095, ORS 161.115, and ORS 161.105.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.095(l) — 1 case
City of Eugene v. Smyth (2010) orctapp
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.