Oregon Revised Statutes
Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.235 (2026)
Possession of a burglary tool or theft device
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
ORSoregonlegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
164.235 Possession of a burglary tool or theft device. (1) A person commits the crime of possession of a burglary tool or theft device if the person possesses a burglary tool or theft device and the person:
(a) Intends to use the tool or device to commit or facilitate a forcible entry into premises or a theft by a physical taking; or
(b) Knows that another person intends to use the tool or device to commit or facilitate a forcible entry into premises or a theft by a physical taking.
(2) For purposes of this section, “burglary tool or theft device” means an acetylene torch, electric arc, burning bar, thermal lance, oxygen lance or other similar device capable of burning through steel, concrete or other solid material, a signal jammer that can interfere with the function of an alarm system or signals or communications to and from an alarm system or nitroglycerine, dynamite, gunpowder or any other explosive, tool, instrument or other article adapted or designed for committing or facilitating a forcible entry into premises or theft by a physical taking.
(3) Possession of a burglary tool or theft device is a Class A misdemeanor. [1971 c.743 §138; 1999 c.1040 §13; 2003 c.577 §9; 2025 c.139 §1]
164.240 [Amended by 1959 c.99 §1; repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 58
cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: State v. Graves, 700 P.2d 244 (Or. 1985).
State v. Graves, 700 P.2d 244 (Or. 1985). “225(1)(a) which has the effect of increasing by 15 years the penalty for second degree burglary when a person commits second degree burglary and “in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom he * * * [i]s armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in…”
People v. Carter, 117 P.3d 476 (Cal. 2005). “215 and the building is a dwelling, or if in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom he: “(a) Is armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in ORS 164.235 or a deadly weapon, or; “(b) Causes or attempts to cause physical injury to any person, or; “(c)…”
State v. Cook, 335 P.3d 846 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “085(7), to use the spark plugs to commit or facilitate a theft by physical taking solely because that burglary tool has no legitimate use or purpose. We reject that argument because it would have the effect of collapsing the intent element of the crime into the possession…”
State v. Klein, 228 P.3d 714 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “Possession of burglary tools is a violation of ORS 164.235. 1 Rather than asking about the keys, Hertzler asked defendant if he had any drugs on him.”
State v. Brown, 800 P.2d 259 (Or. 1990). “215 and the building is a dwelling, or if in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom the person: “(a) Is armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in ORS 164.235 or a deadly weapon; or “(b) Causes or attempts to cause physical injury to any person;…”
State v. Pilgrim, 369 P.3d 434 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for possession of a burglary tool or theft device, ORS 164.235, raising two assignments of error.”
State v. Reams, 636 P.2d 913 (Or. 1981). “215 and the building is a dwelling, or if in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom he: "(a) Is armed with a burglar's tool as defined in ORS 164.235 or a deadly weapon; or "(b) Causes or attempts to cause physical injury to any person; or "(c)…”
State v. Johnson, 637 P.2d 211 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). “215 and * * * in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom he: “(a) Is armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in ORS 164.235 * * * He contends that the definition of “burglar’s tools” in ORS 164.”
State v. Thompson, 971 P.2d 879 (Or. 1999). “215 and the building is a dwelling, or if in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom the person: “(a) Is armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in ORS 164.235 or a deadly weapon; or “(b) Causes or attempts to cause physical injury to any person;…”
State v. Warner, 696 P.2d 1052 (Or. 1985). “The crime is elevated to burglary in the first degree if the defendant “in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom * * * is armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in ORS 164.235 * * *.” First degree burglary is a Class A felony, carrying a maximum…”
State v. Butkovich, 743 P.2d 752 (Or. Ct. App. 1987). “, coupled with his wife's startled reaction and her apparent effort to hide something under the seat, provided a reasonable suspicion that defendant or his wife had committed or was committing a crime. This crime could have been, among others, unlawful possession of a firearm,…”
State v. Montoya, 2021 NMCA 006 (N.M. Ct. App. 2020). “Oregon’s statute criminalizing possession of burglary tools, Or. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 164.235 (West 2003) much like our statute, requires both possession of a tool designed or used for burglary and the intent to use that tool to commit unauthorized entry.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.235(1) — 4 cases
State v. Graves, 700 P.2d 244 (Or. 1985). “225(1)(a) which has the effect of increasing by 15 years the penalty for second degree burglary when a person commits second degree burglary and “in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom he * * * [i]s armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in…”
State v. Cook, 335 P.3d 846 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “085(7), to use the spark plugs to commit or facilitate a theft by physical taking solely because that burglary tool has no legitimate use or purpose. We reject that argument because it would have the effect of collapsing the intent element of the crime into the possession…”
State v. Pilgrim, 369 P.3d 434 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for possession of a burglary tool or theft device, ORS 164.235, raising two assignments of error.”
State v. Johnson, 637 P.2d 211 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). “215 and * * * in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom he: “(a) Is armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in ORS 164.235 * * * He contends that the definition of “burglar’s tools” in ORS 164.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.235(2) — 14 cases
State v. Graves, 700 P.2d 244 (Or. 1985). “225(1)(a) which has the effect of increasing by 15 years the penalty for second degree burglary when a person commits second degree burglary and “in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom he * * * [i]s armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in…”
State v. Cook, 335 P.3d 846 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “085(7), to use the spark plugs to commit or facilitate a theft by physical taking solely because that burglary tool has no legitimate use or purpose. We reject that argument because it would have the effect of collapsing the intent element of the crime into the possession…”
State v. Warner, 696 P.2d 1052 (Or. 1985). “The crime is elevated to burglary in the first degree if the defendant “in effecting entry or while in a building or in immediate flight therefrom * * * is armed with a burglar’s tool as defined in ORS 164.235 * * *.” First degree burglary is a Class A felony, carrying a maximum…”
State v. Reid, 585 P.2d 411 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
State v. Brown, 606 P.2d 678 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.235(l)(a) — 1 case
State v. Cook, 335 P.3d 846 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “085(7), to use the spark plugs to commit or facilitate a theft by physical taking solely because that burglary tool has no legitimate use or purpose. We reject that argument because it would have the effect of collapsing the intent element of the crime into the possession…”
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.