Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.702 (2026)

Exceptions to ORS 163.700 and 163.701

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

      163.702 Exceptions to ORS 163.700 and 163.701. (1) The provisions of ORS 163.700 and 163.701 do not apply to:

      (a) Any legitimate medical procedure performed by or under the direction of a person licensed to provide medical service for the purpose of medical diagnosis, treatment, education or research, including, but not limited to, the recording of medical procedures; and

      (b) Any activity undertaken in the course of bona fide law enforcement or corrections activity or necessary to the proper functioning of the criminal justice system, including but not limited to the operation and management of jails, prisons and other youth and adult corrections facilities.

      (2) The provisions of ORS 163.701 (1)(a) do not apply to a visual recording of a person under 12 years of age if:

      (a) The person who makes or records the visual recording is the father, mother, sibling, grandparent, aunt, uncle or first cousin, by blood, adoption or marriage, of the person under 12 years of age; and

      (b) The visual recording is made or recorded for a purpose other than arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the person or another person. [1997 c.697 §2; 2009 c.877 §2; 2015 c.645 §7]

 

      Note: See note under 163.700.

 

MISCELLANEOUS

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2000–2023 · leading case: State v. Parra-Sanchez, 527 P.3d 1008 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
State v. Parra-Sanchez, 527 P.3d 1008 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “In its current form, it reads: “(1) Except as provided in ORS 163.702, a person com- mits the crime of invasion of personal privacy in the second degree if: “(a)(A) For the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the person, the person is in a location to observe…”
State v. Stevenson, 2000 WI 71 (Wis. 2000). · cites it 2× “700 (1997) reads in pertinent part: (1) Except as provided in ORS 163.702 [enumerated exceptions], a person commits the crime of invasion of personal privacy if: (a) The person knowingly makes or records a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other visual recording of…”
State v. Luman, 223 P.3d 1041 (Or. 2009). · cites it 2× “700 provides, in part: "(1) Except as provided in ORS 163.702 [pertaining to medical and law enforcement exceptions], a person commits the crime of invasion of personal privacy if: "(a)(A) The person knowingly makes or records a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other…”
State v. Luman, 188 P.3d 372 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “700 provides, in part: “(1) Except as provided in ORS 163.702 [pertaining to medical and law enforcement exceptions], a person commits the crime of invasion of personal privacy if: “(a)(A) The person knowingly makes or records a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other…”
State v. McQueen, 478 P.3d 581 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “700(1) (2013) provided: “Except as provided in ORS 163.702, a person commits the crime of inva- sion of personal privacy if: “(a)(A) The person knowingly makes or records a photograph, motion picture, videotape or other visual recording of another person in a state of nudity…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.702(2)(a) — 1 case
State v. Parra-Sanchez, 527 P.3d 1008 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “In its current form, it reads: “(1) Except as provided in ORS 163.702, a person com- mits the crime of invasion of personal privacy in the second degree if: “(a)(A) For the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of the person, the person is in a location to observe…”
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.