Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427

Sexual abuse in the first degree

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      163.427 Sexual abuse in the first degree. (1) A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree when that person:

      (a) Subjects another person to sexual contact and:

      (A) The victim is less than 14 years of age;

      (B) The victim is subjected to forcible compulsion by the actor; or

      (C) The victim is incapable of consent by reason of being mentally incapacitated, physically helpless or incapable of appraising the nature of the victim’s conduct; or

      (b) Intentionally causes a person under 18 years of age to touch or contact the mouth, anus or sex organs of an animal for the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of a person.

      (2) Sexual abuse in the first degree is a Class B felony. [1991 c.830 §3; 1995 c.657 §12; 1995 c.671 §10; 2021 c.82 §7]

 

      Note: 163.427 was enacted into law by the Legislative Assembly but was not added to or made a part of ORS chapter 163 or any series therein by legislative action. See Preface to Oregon Revised Statutes for further explanation.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 878 cases (315 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: State v. Rodriguez/Buck
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or · cites it 28× “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Parkins (2009) or · cites it 14× “ORS 163.427 defines first-degree sexual abuse: "(1) A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree when that person: "(a) Subjects another person to sexual contact and: "(A) The victim is less than 14 years of age; "(B) The victim is subjected to forcible…”
State v. Marshall (2011) or · cites it 22× “In this criminal case, defendant challenges the denial of his motion for judgments of acquittal on two charges of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427. He argues, with respect to both charges, that the state’s evidence was insufficient to support a finding that he subjected…”
State v. Carlton (2017) or · cites it 13× “In his reply memorandum, defendant asserted that the California offenses were not comparable to first-degree sexual abuse under ORS 163.427 because the Oregon offense had different elements from the California offense, which swept more broadly.”
State v. Ryan (2017) or · cites it 6× “Defendant, who is intellectually disabled, makes an as-applied challenge to his 75-month mandatory mini- mum prison sentence for first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427, on the ground that it violates Article I, section 16, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Eighth Amendment to…”
United States v. Doroteo Rocha-Alvarado (2016) ca9 · cites it 14× “Rocha-Alvarado pled no contest to three counts of attempted sexual abuse in the first degree in violation of Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427 and was then deported to Mexico.”
State v. Woods (2022) orctapp · cites it 11× “In this case, defendant contends that the same is true with respect to the incapacity to consent element and that those cases therefore compel the conclusion that a knowingly culpable mental state also applies to the victim’s incapacity to consent element of first-degree rape…”
State v. Reed (2005) or · cites it 8× “A 13-count indictment charged defendant with various sex crimes against his daughter, including first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427(1), [1] first-degree unlawful sexual penetration, ORS 163.”
Federico Diego De Diego v. Jefferson Sessions (2017) ca9 · cites it 5× “See Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427 . The BIA therefore determined that Diego was deportable, terminated his asylee status, denied his request for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident, and denied waiver of inadmissibility.”
State v. Marshall (2010) orctapp · cites it 29× “Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for two counts of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427, and one count of coercion, ORS 163.”
State v. McFee (1995) orctapp · cites it 14× “Defendant appeals from a conviction for sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.427. He assigns error to that portion of his sentence ordering him to complete 86 months of post-prison supervision pursuant to ORS 144.”
State v. Clay (2019) orctapp · cites it 7× “On appeal, he assigns error to the trial court’s denial of his motion for judg- ment of acquittal on the display counts, arguing, among other things, that ORS 163.”
Show all 878 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(1) — 31 cases
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Ryan (2017) or “Defendant, who is intellectually disabled, makes an as-applied challenge to his 75-month mandatory mini- mum prison sentence for first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427, on the ground that it violates Article I, section 16, of the Oregon Constitution, and the Eighth Amendment to…”
State v. Marshall (2010) orctapp “Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for two counts of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427, and one count of coercion, ORS 163.”
State v. Reed (2005) or “A 13-count indictment charged defendant with various sex crimes against his daughter, including first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427(1), [1] first-degree unlawful sexual penetration, ORS 163.”
State v. Camacho-Garcia (2014) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(1)(a) — 19 cases
State v. Marshall (2011) or “In this criminal case, defendant challenges the denial of his motion for judgments of acquittal on two charges of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427. He argues, with respect to both charges, that the state’s evidence was insufficient to support a finding that he subjected…”
State v. Parkins (2009) or “ORS 163.427 defines first-degree sexual abuse: "(1) A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree when that person: "(a) Subjects another person to sexual contact and: "(A) The victim is less than 14 years of age; "(B) The victim is subjected to forcible…”
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Martinez (2024) orctapp
State v. Moles (2019) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(1)(a)(A) — 31 cases
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Parkins (2009) or “ORS 163.427 defines first-degree sexual abuse: "(1) A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree when that person: "(a) Subjects another person to sexual contact and: "(A) The victim is less than 14 years of age; "(B) The victim is subjected to forcible…”
Antoine v. Taylor (2021) or
State v. Garrett (2019) orctapp
State v. Kitzman (1996) or
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(1)(a)(B) — 17 cases
State v. Davis (2024) or
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Davis (2018) orctapp
State v. Marshall (2011) or “In this criminal case, defendant challenges the denial of his motion for judgments of acquittal on two charges of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427. He argues, with respect to both charges, that the state’s evidence was insufficient to support a finding that he subjected…”
State v. Eggers (2023) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(1)(a)(C) — 14 cases
State v. Woods (2022) orctapp “In this case, defendant contends that the same is true with respect to the incapacity to consent element and that those cases therefore compel the conclusion that a knowingly culpable mental state also applies to the victim’s incapacity to consent element of first-degree rape…”
State v. Reed (2005) or “A 13-count indictment charged defendant with various sex crimes against his daughter, including first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427(1), [1] first-degree unlawful sexual penetration, ORS 163.”
State v. Marker (2014) orctapp
State v. Parra-Sanchez (2023) orctapp
State v. Wallace (2024) or
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(1)(b) — 3 cases
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Marshall (2011) or “In this criminal case, defendant challenges the denial of his motion for judgments of acquittal on two charges of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427. He argues, with respect to both charges, that the state’s evidence was insufficient to support a finding that he subjected…”
State v. Padilla (2016) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(1)(d) — 2 cases
STATE EX REL. JUV. DEPT. v. Nicholls (2004) orctapp
State ex rel. Juvenile Department v. Nicholls (2004) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(2) — 14 cases
State v. Marshall (2011) or “In this criminal case, defendant challenges the denial of his motion for judgments of acquittal on two charges of first-degree sexual abuse, ORS 163.427. He argues, with respect to both charges, that the state’s evidence was insufficient to support a finding that he subjected…”
Blackledge v. Morrow (2001) orctapp
Layton v. Hall (2002) orctapp
State v. Evans (2016) orctapp
State v. Bradley (2020) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(a) — 1 case
State v. Cave (2022) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(a)(A) — 1 case
State v. Meighan (2023) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(l)(a) — 6 cases
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
Department of Human Services v. D. M. T. (2010) orctapp
State v. Wert (1996) orctapp
State v. Black (2015) orctapp
Moser v. Lampert (2005) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(l)(a)(A) — 15 cases
State v. Carlton (2017) or “In his reply memorandum, defendant asserted that the California offenses were not comparable to first-degree sexual abuse under ORS 163.427 because the Oregon offense had different elements from the California offense, which swept more broadly.”
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Parkins (2009) or “ORS 163.427 defines first-degree sexual abuse: "(1) A person commits the crime of sexual abuse in the first degree when that person: "(a) Subjects another person to sexual contact and: "(A) The victim is less than 14 years of age; "(B) The victim is subjected to forcible…”
State v. Hunt (2015) orctapp
State v. Black (2015) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(l)(a)(B) — 9 cases
State v. Gray (2014) orctapp
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Nelson (2011) orctapp
State v. Wier (2013) orctapp
State v. Fox (2014) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(l)(a)(C) — 6 cases
State v. Johnson (2006) or
State v. Simons (2007) orctapp
State v. Barnes (2006) orctapp
State v. Black (2015) orctapp
State v. Callender (2002) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(l)(a)(b) — 1 case
State v. Wier (2013) orctapp
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.427(l)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Rodriguez/Buck (2009) or “That view is strengthened when we compare defendants' conduct with other conduct that ORS 163.427 explicitly brings within its scope and that also may be prosecuted as first-degree sexual abuse.”
State v. Williams (2013) orctapp
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.