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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.305 (2026)

Tampering with public records

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

      162.305 Tampering with public records. (1) A person commits the crime of tampering with public records if, without lawful authority, the person knowingly destroys, mutilates, conceals, removes, makes a false entry in or falsely alters any public record, including records relating to the Oregon State Lottery.

      (2)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this subsection, tampering with public records is a Class A misdemeanor.

      (b) Tampering with records relating to the Oregon State Lottery is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §205; 1991 c.962 §16]

 

      162.310 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1982–2000 · leading case: State v. Gortmaker, 655 P.2d 575 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Gortmaker, 655 P.2d 575 (Or. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 4× “055; tampering with public records, ORS 162.305; unsworn falsification, ORS 162.”
State v. Brantner, 758 A.2d 84 (Md. 2000). “on is guilty of tampering with public records in the second degree when, knowing that he does not have the authority of anyone entitled to grant it, he knowingly removes, mutilates, destroys, conceals, makes a false entry in or falsely alters any record or other written…”
In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Leonhardt, 930 P.2d 844 (Or. 1997). “013(l)(d), and two misdemeanor counts of tampering with public records, ORS 162.305(1). This court suspended the accused from the practice of law on May 24, 1994, following those criminal convictions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.305(1) — 1 case
In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of Leonhardt, 930 P.2d 844 (Or. 1997). “013(l)(d), and two misdemeanor counts of tampering with public records, ORS 162.305(1). This court suspended the accused from the practice of law on May 24, 1994, following those criminal convictions.”
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.