161.195 “Justification”
described. (1)
Unless inconsistent with other provisions of chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971,
defining justifiable use of physical force, or with some other provision of
law, conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not
criminal when it is required or authorized by law or by a judicial decree or is
performed by a public servant in the reasonable exercise of official powers,
duties or functions.
(2) As used in
subsection (1) of this section, “laws and judicial decrees” include but are not
limited to:
(a) Laws defining
duties and functions of public servants;
(b) Laws defining
duties of private citizens to assist public servants in the performance of
certain of their functions;
(c) Laws
governing the execution of legal process;
(d) Laws
governing the military services and conduct of war; and
(e) Judgments and
orders of courts. [1971 c.743 §19]
Note: See note under 161.015.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
9
cases (
5 in the last 5 years), 1974–2025 · leading case:
State v. Stone
State v. Stone (2023)
orctapp · cites it 2×
“190 (“In any prosecution for an offense, justification, as defined in ORS 161.195 to 161.275, is a defense.”); ORS 161.”
Harryman v. Fred Meyer, Inc. (2017)
orctapp · cites it 5×
“*328 "(5) The defense established by this section is not available if the injury or death resulted from the use of physical force that was not justifiable under the standards established by ORS 161.195 to 161.275." Defendant submitted evidence of plaintiff's conviction of second…”
State v. Wright (1990)
or
“195(1) provides in part: “Unless inconsistent with other provisions of chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, defining justifiable use of physical force, or with some other provision of law, conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when it is…”
State v. McCoy (1974)
orctapp · cites it 2×
“190 provides: "In any prosecution for an offense, justification, as defined in ORS 161.195 to 161.275, is a defense." See also ORS 161.”
State v. Mickels (2024)
orctapp
“190 provides that justification defenses “as defined in ORS 161.195 to 161.275,” which includes 2 ORS 161.”
State v. Jackson (1977)
orctapp
“190 provides: "In any prosecution for an offense, justification, as defined in ORS 161.195 to 161.275, is a defense.””
State v. Williams (2025)
or
“Three of those statutes, like the robbery statutes, were enacted as part of the 1971 revision of the Criminal Code.”
Diamond v. City of Sandy (2025)
ord
“(5) The defense established by this section is not available if the injury or death resulted from the use of physical force that was not justifiable under the standards established by ORS 161.195 to 161.275. There are genuine disputes of material fact that preclude the Court…”
State v. Williams (2025)
or
“Three of those statutes, like the robbery statutes, were enacted as part of the 1971 revision of the Criminal Code.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.195(1) — 3 cases
State v. Stone (2023)
orctapp
“190 (“In any prosecution for an offense, justification, as defined in ORS 161.195 to 161.275, is a defense.”); ORS 161.”
State v. Wright (1990)
or
“195(1) provides in part: “Unless inconsistent with other provisions of chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, defining justifiable use of physical force, or with some other provision of law, conduct which would otherwise constitute an offense is justifiable and not criminal when it is…”
Harryman v. Fred Meyer, Inc. (2017)
orctapp
“*328 "(5) The defense established by this section is not available if the injury or death resulted from the use of physical force that was not justifiable under the standards established by ORS 161.195 to 161.275." Defendant submitted evidence of plaintiff's conviction of second…”
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.