Oregon Revised Statutes
Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.245 (2026)
Custodial interference in the second degree
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
ORSoregonlegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
163.245 Custodial interference in the second degree. (1) A person commits the crime of custodial interference in the second degree if, knowing or having reason to know that the person has no legal right to do so, the person takes, entices or keeps another person from the other person’s lawful custodian or in violation of a valid joint custody order with intent to hold the other person permanently or for a protracted period.
(2) Expenses incurred by a lawful custodial parent or a parent enforcing a valid joint custody order in locating and regaining physical custody of the person taken, enticed or kept in violation of this section are “economic damages” for purposes of restitution under ORS 137.103 to 137.109.
(3) Custodial interference in the second degree is a Class C felony. [1971 c.743 §100; 1981 c.774 §1; 1987 c.795 §7; 2005 c.564 §6]
163.250 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]
163.255 [1955 c.530 §1; repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: State v. Donovan, 770 P.2d 581 (Or. 1989).
State v. Donovan, 770 P.2d 581 (Or. 1989). “Defendant was indicted in December 1982 on two counts of custodial interference, ORS 163.245 and 163.257. He was located in California in October 1986, arrested and returned to Oregon for trial.”
State v. Adicho, 105 P.3d 916 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “ORS 163.245. He contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal because the state presented insufficient evidence that he knowingly kept a 14-year-old juvenile, T, from her lawful custodian.”
State Ex Rel Johnson v. Bail, 938 P.2d 209 (Or. 1997). “In February 1993, mother pleaded guilty to custodial interference in the second degree, ORS 163.245. 3 Mother was sentenced to 20 hours of community service; she completed that sentence.”
State v. Fitouri, 893 P.2d 556 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “257, provides: “(1) A person commits the crime of custodial interference in the first degree if the person violates ORS 163.245 and: “(a) Causes the person taken, enticed or kept from the lawful custodian or in violation of a valid joint custody order to be removed from the…”
State v. West, 688 P.2d 406 (Or. Ct. App. 1984). “257 provides: “(1) A person commits the crime of custodial interference in the first degree if the person violates ORS 163.245 and: *170 “(a) Causes the person taken, enticed or kept from the lawful custodian to be removed from the state; or “(b) Exposes that person to a…”
McBride v. Magnuson, 578 P.2d 1259 (Or. 1978). “See ORS 163.245, 419.519; cf. McEvoy v. Helikson, 277 Or 781 , 562 P2d 540 (1977).”
Mut. of Enumclaw Ins. v. Gutman, 21 P.3d 101 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “See ORS 163.245; ORS 163.257.” Defendants respond that the elements of false imprisonment do not match the elements of the crime of custodial interference.”
State v. Easton, 582 P.2d 37 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “1 "(1) A person commits the crime of custodial interference in the first degree if he violates ORS 163.245 and: "(a) Causes the person taken, enticed or kept from his lawful custodian to be removed from the state; or "(b) Exposes that person to a substantial risk of illness or…”
State v. Gerlach, 300 P.3d 193 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “Like the kidnapping statutes, the custodial interference statutes define the basic crime as a second-degree offense, ORS 163.245, and elevate the crime to first-degree custodial interference by proof of certain additional elements, ORS 163.”
State v. Dirks, 581 P.2d 85 (Or. Ct. App. 1978). “*37 As to whether the evidence was sufficient to show that defendant intended to hold the children for a permanent or protracted period of time, as those terms are used in ORS 163.245, the record indicates that the mother was not informed of any plan to return the children,…”
State v. Haddon, 399 P.3d 458 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). “257(1), where a person commits first-degree custodial interference if the person violates ORS 163.245 (second-degree custodial interference), in addition to a condition of first-degree custodial interference.”
Kent v. Cupp, 554 P.2d 196 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). “640 (now superseded by ORS 163.245 and 163.257) and subsequent sentence to an indeterminate life sentence as a sex offender, plaintiff was permitted to participate in sex offender treatment programs and such other treatment programs as were available at the penitentiary.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.245(1) — 8 cases
State v. Gerlach, 300 P.3d 193 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “Like the kidnapping statutes, the custodial interference statutes define the basic crime as a second-degree offense, ORS 163.245, and elevate the crime to first-degree custodial interference by proof of certain additional elements, ORS 163.”
State v. Adicho, 105 P.3d 916 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “ORS 163.245. He contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal because the state presented insufficient evidence that he knowingly kept a 14-year-old juvenile, T, from her lawful custodian.”
State v. Childress, 345 Or. App. 576 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
State v. Fitouri, 893 P.2d 556 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “257, provides: “(1) A person commits the crime of custodial interference in the first degree if the person violates ORS 163.245 and: “(a) Causes the person taken, enticed or kept from the lawful custodian or in violation of a valid joint custody order to be removed from the…”
State v. Gambone, 763 P.2d 188 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
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.