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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315 (2026)

Resisting arrest

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

      162.315 Resisting arrest. (1) A person commits the crime of resisting arrest if the person intentionally resists a person known by the person to be a peace officer or parole and probation officer in making an arrest.

      (2) As used in this section:

      (a) “Arrest” has the meaning given that term in ORS 133.005 and includes, but is not limited to, the booking process.

      (b) “Parole and probation officer” has the meaning given that term in ORS 181A.355.

      (c) “Resists” means the use or threatened use of violence, physical force or any other means that creates a substantial risk of physical injury to any person and includes, but is not limited to, behavior clearly intended to prevent being taken into custody by overcoming the actions of the arresting officer. The behavior does not have to result in actual physical injury to an officer. Passive resistance does not constitute behavior intended to prevent being taken into custody.

      (3) It is no defense to a prosecution under this section that the peace officer or parole and probation officer lacked legal authority to make the arrest or book the person, provided the officer was acting under color of official authority.

      (4) Resisting arrest is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §206; 1989 c.877 §1; 1997 c.749 §3; 2005 c.668 §2]

 

      162.320 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

 

      162.322 [1961 c.649 §1; repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

 

      162.324 [1961 c.649 §2; repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 235 cases (74 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: State v. McNally, 392 P.3d 721 (Or. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. McNally, 392 P.3d 721 (Or. 2017). · cites it 34× ““* * * * * “(3) This section does not apply in situations in which the person is engaging in: Cite as 361 Or 314 (2017) 321 “(a) Activity that would constitute resisting arrest under ORS 162.315; or “(b) Passive resistance.” Defendant’s theory of the case is that he is not…”
State v. Prophet, 507 P.3d 735 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 21× “315, arguing that the trial court erred by refusing to deliver her proposed jury instruction stating that an individual must intentionally create a substan- tial risk of harm to be convicted of resisting arrest. Held: For statutes within the Criminal Code, every element other…”
State v. Olive, 312 P.3d 588 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 20× “In this criminal case, defendant appeals a judgment convicting him of resisting arrest, ORS 162.315, and interfering with a peace officer, ORS 162.”
State v. Gaines, 206 P.3d 1042 (Or. 2009). · cites it 3× “247(l)(b), which prohibits “[interfering with a peace officer” and provides, in part, “A person commits the crime of interfering with a peace officer or parole and probation officer if the person, knowing that another person is a peace officer * * * [r]efuses to obey a lawful…”
United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). “§ 28-904 (1)(b) (2016) ("substantial risk of causing physical injury"); Ore. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(2)(c) (2017) ("substantial risk of physical injury").”
State v. Tow, 515 P.3d 936 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 7× “Tow, 318 Or App 566 , 507 P3d 295 (2022), in which the Court of Appeals affirmed defendant’s conviction of resist- ing arrest, ORS 162.315, as well as the trial court’s finding that he violated the terms of his probation, in light of the recent decision in State v.”
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). · cites it 2× “1983); Ore. Rev. Stat. § 162.315 (1983). This lenient approach does avoid the anomaly of automatically transforming every fleeing misdemeanant into a fleeing felon — subject, under the common-law rule, to apprehension by deadly force — solely by virtue of his flight.”
State v. Garcia, 377 P.3d 596 (Multnomah Cty. Cir. Ct., O.R. 2016). · cites it 11× “247, 1 provides that it “does not apply in situations in which the person is engaging in * * * activity that would constitute resisting arrest under ORS 162.315 [,]” 2 On appeal, defendant asserts that the trial court erred by submitting the IPO count to the jury, because the…”
State v. Sell, 536 P.3d 1019 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 5× “208 (Count 1),1 resisting arrest, ORS 162.315 (Count 2), and interfering with a peace officer, ORS 162.”
State v. Vanornum, 317 P.3d 889 (Or. 2013). · cites it 2× “Defendant appealed his conviction for resisting arrest, ORS 162.315, raising, among other issues, two claims that the trial court erred in instructing the jury.”
State v. McClure, 300 P.3d 210 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 62× “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for resisting arrest, ORS 162.315. On appeal, he assigns error to (1) the trial court’s admission of “prior bad acts” evidence related to defendant’s prior conviction for resisting arrest, and (2) the court’s denial of his motion for…”
Purnell v. State, 827 A.2d 68 (Md. 2003). · cites it 4× “The Commentary to the Proposed Oregon Criminal Code notes that the adoption of ORS 162.315 was intended to achieve a balance of these conflicting interests by addressing the “threat to society posed by violent street confrontations between private citizens and the police.”
Show all 235 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(1) — 37 cases
State v. Gaines, 206 P.3d 1042 (Or. 2009). “247(l)(b), which prohibits “[interfering with a peace officer” and provides, in part, “A person commits the crime of interfering with a peace officer or parole and probation officer if the person, knowing that another person is a peace officer * * * [r]efuses to obey a lawful…”
State v. Olive, 312 P.3d 588 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “In this criminal case, defendant appeals a judgment convicting him of resisting arrest, ORS 162.315, and interfering with a peace officer, ORS 162.”
State v. Prophet, 507 P.3d 735 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “315, arguing that the trial court erred by refusing to deliver her proposed jury instruction stating that an individual must intentionally create a substan- tial risk of harm to be convicted of resisting arrest. Held: For statutes within the Criminal Code, every element other…”
Purnell v. State, 827 A.2d 68 (Md. 2003). “The Commentary to the Proposed Oregon Criminal Code notes that the adoption of ORS 162.315 was intended to achieve a balance of these conflicting interests by addressing the “threat to society posed by violent street confrontations between private citizens and the police.”
State v. Sell, 536 P.3d 1019 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “208 (Count 1),1 resisting arrest, ORS 162.315 (Count 2), and interfering with a peace officer, ORS 162.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(2) — 13 cases
State v. Bolden, 801 P.2d 863 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Strandquist, 644 P.2d 658 (Or. Ct. App. 1982).
State v. Allison, 799 P.2d 676 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Williams, 374 Or. 648 (Or. 2025).
State Ex Rel. Juv. Dep't v. Stout, 811 P.2d 660 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(2)(a) — 4 cases
State v. McClure, 300 P.3d 210 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for resisting arrest, ORS 162.315. On appeal, he assigns error to (1) the trial court’s admission of “prior bad acts” evidence related to defendant’s prior conviction for resisting arrest, and (2) the court’s denial of his motion for…”
State v. Lonergan, 149 P.3d 1215 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
State v. McClure, 335 P.3d 1260 (Or. 2014).
Smith v. Yanes (D. Or. 2024).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(2)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Prophet, 507 P.3d 735 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “315, arguing that the trial court erred by refusing to deliver her proposed jury instruction stating that an individual must intentionally create a substan- tial risk of harm to be convicted of resisting arrest. Held: For statutes within the Criminal Code, every element other…”
Purnell v. State, 827 A.2d 68 (Md. 2003). “The Commentary to the Proposed Oregon Criminal Code notes that the adoption of ORS 162.315 was intended to achieve a balance of these conflicting interests by addressing the “threat to society posed by violent street confrontations between private citizens and the police.”
State v. Owens, 979 P.2d 284 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
State v. Peterson, 79 P.3d 315 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(2)(c) — 25 cases
State v. Gaines, 206 P.3d 1042 (Or. 2009). “247(l)(b), which prohibits “[interfering with a peace officer” and provides, in part, “A person commits the crime of interfering with a peace officer or parole and probation officer if the person, knowing that another person is a peace officer * * * [r]efuses to obey a lawful…”
United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). “§ 28-904 (1)(b) (2016) ("substantial risk of causing physical injury"); Ore. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(2)(c) (2017) ("substantial risk of physical injury").”
State v. McNally, 392 P.3d 721 (Or. 2017). ““* * * * * “(3) This section does not apply in situations in which the person is engaging in: Cite as 361 Or 314 (2017) 321 “(a) Activity that would constitute resisting arrest under ORS 162.315; or “(b) Passive resistance.” Defendant’s theory of the case is that he is not…”
State v. Oliphant, 218 P.3d 1281 (Or. 2009).
State v. Tow, 515 P.3d 936 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “Tow, 318 Or App 566 , 507 P3d 295 (2022), in which the Court of Appeals affirmed defendant’s conviction of resist- ing arrest, ORS 162.315, as well as the trial court’s finding that he violated the terms of his probation, in light of the recent decision in State v.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(3) — 10 cases
State v. Wright, 799 P.2d 642 (Or. 1990).
Purnell v. State, 827 A.2d 68 (Md. 2003). “The Commentary to the Proposed Oregon Criminal Code notes that the adoption of ORS 162.315 was intended to achieve a balance of these conflicting interests by addressing the “threat to society posed by violent street confrontations between private citizens and the police.”
State v. Bistrika, 322 P.3d 583 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Bistrika, 324 P.3d 584 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. McVay, 833 P.2d 297 (Or. 1992).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(4) — 2 cases
City of Klamath Falls v. Winters, 619 P.2d 217 (Or. 1980).
City of Klamath Falls v. Winters, 619 P.2d 217 (Or. 1980).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 162.315(c) — 1 case
State v. De Acosta (Or. Ct. App. 2026).
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.