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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.295 (2026)

Guilty except for insanity

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

      161.295 Guilty except for insanity. (1) A person is guilty except for insanity if, at the time of engaging in criminal conduct, the person lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of the conduct or to conform the conduct to the requirements of law, and:

      (a) But for a qualifying mental disorder, the person would have had such substantial capacity;

      (b) A mental disorder other than a qualifying mental disorder is not the primary cause of the lack of substantial capacity; and

      (c) The lack of substantial capacity is not the result of voluntary intoxication in combination with a qualifying mental disorder, a mental disorder other than a qualifying mental disorder or both.

      (2) As used in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971, the term “qualifying mental disorder” does not include an abnormality manifested only by repeated criminal or otherwise antisocial conduct, nor does the term include any abnormality constituting solely a personality disorder. [1971 c.743 §36; 1983 c.800 §1; 2017 c.634 §3; 2025 c.119 §1]

 

      Note: See note under 161.015.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 187 cases (30 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: State v. Olmstead, 800 P.2d 277 (Or. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Olmstead, 800 P.2d 277 (Or. 1990). · cites it 85× “010, [1] and driving while suspended (DWS), ORS 811.”
State v. Meiser, 551 P.3d 349 (Or. 2024). · cites it 57× “295 provides that “[a] person is guilty except for insanity if, as a result of mental disease or defect at the time of engaging in crimi- nal conduct, the person lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of the conduct or to conform the conduct to the…”
Tharp v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 110 P.3d 103 (Or. 2005). · cites it 31× “This case requires us to determine whether, for purposes of ORS 161.295, substance dependency is a “mental disease or defect,” or, instead, is a “personality disorder.”
State v. Meiser, 481 P.3d 375 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 28× “See ORS 161.295 (2011) (GEI defense).2 On appeal, defendant raises four assignments of error.”
State v. Meiser, 506 P.3d 402 (Or. 2022). · cites it 27× “Held: ORS 161.295 provides that a co-occurring dis- order that is solely a personality disorder is excluded from the “mental disease or defect” that forms the basis for a GEI defense, but the statute does not require a defendant asserting the GEI defense to prove that a…”
State v. Meiser, 524 P.3d 130 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 29× “Clackamas County Circuit Court CR1201547; A166534 524 P3d 130 This case, which involves the requirements for establishing a guilty except for insanity (GEI) defense under ORS 161.295 (2011), amended by Or Laws 2017, ch 634, § 3, is on remand from the Oregon Supreme Court.”
Hanson v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 965 P.2d 1051 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 42× “The majority holds that "alcohol abuse" is a mental disease for purposes of PSRB jurisdiction and that there is substantial evidence that petitioner suffers from alcohol abuse.”
State v. Counts, 816 P.2d 1157 (Or. 1991). · cites it 44× “Here, defendant argues that a defendant's mental imbalance (serious enough to constitute insanity as defined by ORS 161.295) should be included in the phrase "the actor's situation.”
Beiswenger v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 84 P.3d 180 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 17× “ORS 161.295 provides: “(1) A person is guilty except for insanity if, as a result of mental disease or defect at the time of engaging in criminal conduct, the person lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of the conduct or to conform the conduct to the…”
Mueller v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 937 P.2d 1028 (Or. 1997). · cites it 28× “As noted, the text of ORS 161.295 does not define the term "personality disorder.”
Osborn v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 934 P.2d 391 (Or. 1997). · cites it 13× “On July 10, 1989, after a trial based on stipulated facts, petitioner was found guilty except for insanity, ORS 161.295, 1 of first-degree sodomy and first-degree sexual abuse of a 10-year-old boy.”
State v. Mains, 669 P.2d 1112 (Or. 1983). · cites it 10× “135(2), and of his intention to introduce evidence of the affirmative defense of mental disease or defect, ORS 161.295, pursuant to ORS 161.309(3). The state responded by obtaining an order, ORS 161.”
Show all 187 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.295(1) — 59 cases
State v. Meiser, 551 P.3d 349 (Or. 2024). “295 provides that “[a] person is guilty except for insanity if, as a result of mental disease or defect at the time of engaging in crimi- nal conduct, the person lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of the conduct or to conform the conduct to the…”
State v. Counts, 816 P.2d 1157 (Or. 1991). “Here, defendant argues that a defendant's mental imbalance (serious enough to constitute insanity as defined by ORS 161.295) should be included in the phrase "the actor's situation.”
State v. Meiser, 524 P.3d 130 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Clackamas County Circuit Court CR1201547; A166534 524 P3d 130 This case, which involves the requirements for establishing a guilty except for insanity (GEI) defense under ORS 161.295 (2011), amended by Or Laws 2017, ch 634, § 3, is on remand from the Oregon Supreme Court.”
State v. Meiser, 506 P.3d 402 (Or. 2022). “Held: ORS 161.295 provides that a co-occurring dis- order that is solely a personality disorder is excluded from the “mental disease or defect” that forms the basis for a GEI defense, but the statute does not require a defendant asserting the GEI defense to prove that a…”
Hanson v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 965 P.2d 1051 (Or. Ct. App. 1998). “The majority holds that "alcohol abuse" is a mental disease for purposes of PSRB jurisdiction and that there is substantial evidence that petitioner suffers from alcohol abuse.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.295(2) — 43 cases
Tharp v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 110 P.3d 103 (Or. 2005). “This case requires us to determine whether, for purposes of ORS 161.295, substance dependency is a “mental disease or defect,” or, instead, is a “personality disorder.”
Mueller v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 937 P.2d 1028 (Or. 1997). “As noted, the text of ORS 161.295 does not define the term "personality disorder.”
State v. Meiser, 551 P.3d 349 (Or. 2024). “295 provides that “[a] person is guilty except for insanity if, as a result of mental disease or defect at the time of engaging in crimi- nal conduct, the person lacks substantial capacity either to appreciate the criminality of the conduct or to conform the conduct to the…”
State v. Meiser, 481 P.3d 375 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “See ORS 161.295 (2011) (GEI defense).2 On appeal, defendant raises four assignments of error.”
Rinne v. Psychiatric Sec. Review Bd., 443 P.3d 731 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
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.