161.475
Defenses to solicitation and conspiracy. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this
section, it is immaterial to the liability of a person who solicits or
conspires with another to commit a crime that:
(a) The person or
the person whom the person solicits or with whom the person conspires does not
occupy a particular position or have a particular characteristic which is an
element of such crime, if the person believes that one of them does; or
(b) The person
whom the person solicits or with whom the person conspires is irresponsible or
has an immunity to prosecution or conviction for the commission of the crime,
or, in the case of conspiracy, has feigned the agreement; or
(c) The person
with whom the person conspires has not been prosecuted for or convicted of the
conspiracy or a crime based upon the conduct in question, or has previously
been acquitted.
(2) It is a
defense to a charge of solicitation or conspiracy to commit a crime that if the
criminal object were achieved, the actor would not be guilty of a crime under
the law defining the offense or as an accomplice under ORS 161.150 to 161.165. [1971
c.743 §63]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
3
cases, 1974–1988 · leading case:
State v. McCoy, 521 P.2d 1074 (Or. Ct. App. 1974).
State v. McCoy, 521 P.2d 1074 (Or. Ct. App. 1974).
· cites it 2× “” See also ORS 161.475 (2) which describes a “defense” to solicitation and conspiracy, ORS 162.”
State v. Mathie, 634 P.2d 799 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 4× “This is demonstrated by ORS 161.475(2), which specifies that it is a defense to the charge of conspiracy that the act intended by the agreement, if accomplished, would not be a crime.”
State v. Bryant, 764 P.2d 970 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
“ORS 161.475(l)(b). Defendant does not assign error to the admission of his statements.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.475(2) — 2 cases
State v. McCoy, 521 P.2d 1074 (Or. Ct. App. 1974).
“” See also ORS 161.475 (2) which describes a “defense” to solicitation and conspiracy, ORS 162.”
State v. Mathie, 634 P.2d 799 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
“This is demonstrated by ORS 161.475(2), which specifies that it is a defense to the charge of conspiracy that the act intended by the agreement, if accomplished, would not be a crime.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 161.475(l)(b) — 1 case
State v. Bryant, 764 P.2d 970 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
“ORS 161.475(l)(b). Defendant does not assign error to the admission of his statements.”
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.