Oregon Revised Statutes
Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405 (2026)
Robbery in the second degree
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
ORSoregonlegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
164.405 Robbery in the second degree. (1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.395 and the person:
(a) Represents by word or conduct that the person is armed with what purports to be a dangerous or deadly weapon; or
(b) Is aided by another person actually present.
(2) Robbery in the second degree is a Class B felony. [1971 c.743 §149]
164.410 [Repealed by 1971 c.743 §432]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 238
cases (51 in the last 5 years), 1973–2026 · leading case: State v. White, 211 P.3d 248 (Or. 2009).
State v. White, 211 P.3d 248 (Or. 2009). “In those statutes, the legislature has provided an incrementally graded set of standards for determining the seriousness of different forms of robbery and has divided those standards into three groups third-degree robbery, second-degree robbery, and first-degree robbery.”
State v. Rennells, 162 P.3d 1006 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “First, ORS 164.405 provides, in part: “(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.”
State v. Vance, 591 P.2d 355 (Or. 1979). “The difference between first degree and second degree robbery as defined in ORS 164.405 and ORS 164.415 appears to be whether defendant's weapon is actually deadly or only `purports to be dangerous or deadly.”
State v. Gaines, 365 P.3d 1103 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “A grand jury indicted defendant for second-degree robbery under ORS 164.405 (1) (b) (a Class B felony) and second-degree theft under ORS 164.”
State v. Morgan, 388 P.3d 1085 (Or. 2017). “In reviewing whether the evidence was sufficient to satisfy the legal requirements of ORS 164.405 (l)(b), the court deemed the relevant standard to be “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, any rational trier of fact could have found the…”
State v. Jackson, 157 P.3d 239 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “The defendant was convicted of second-degree robbery, and we affirmed the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal: “The term ‘aided by another person actually present’ as used in ORS 164.405 includes a person who is at hand, or within reach, sight or call,…”
State v. Parkins, 211 P.3d 262 (Or. 2009). “For second-degree robbery, the elevating elements are either that the robber represents that he or she is armed with something that purports to be a dangerous or deadly weapon (ORS 164.405(1)(a)) or the robber is aided by another person actually present (ORS 164.”
State v. Burris, 348 P.3d 338 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “610(2); two counts of second-degree robbery with a firearm (Counts 2 and 3), ORS 164.405 and ORS 161.610(2); one count of unlawful use of a weapon with a firearm *515 (Count 4), ORS 166.”
State v. White, 175 P.3d 504 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for two counts of second-degree robbery, ORS 164.405, arising out of an episode in which defendant, while shoplifting with another person, threatened one of the store’s employees by representing that he had a weapon.”
Stokeling v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 544 (2019). “21, §§ 797(1)-(3), 801 (2015); Ore. Rev. Stat. §§ 164.405(1)(a), 164.415(1)(b)-(c) (2017); 18 Pa.”
State v. Butterfield, 549 P.3d 545 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “6 Under ORS 164.405, “(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.”
State v. Colmenares-chavez, 260 P.3d 667 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “In determining whether the second-degree robbery verdicts should merge, the court described the statutory scheme as follows: “ORS 164.405 is one of three statutes that, together, make up the statutory scheme respecting robbery.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405(1) — 38 cases
State v. White, 211 P.3d 248 (Or. 2009). “In those statutes, the legislature has provided an incrementally graded set of standards for determining the seriousness of different forms of robbery and has divided those standards into three groups third-degree robbery, second-degree robbery, and first-degree robbery.”
State v. Rennells, 162 P.3d 1006 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “First, ORS 164.405 provides, in part: “(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.”
State v. Hall, 966 P.2d 208 (Or. 1998).
State v. Colmenares-chavez, 260 P.3d 667 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “In determining whether the second-degree robbery verdicts should merge, the court described the statutory scheme as follows: “ORS 164.405 is one of three statutes that, together, make up the statutory scheme respecting robbery.”
State v. Taylor, 523 P.3d 696 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405(1)(a) — 20 cases
State v. White, 211 P.3d 248 (Or. 2009). “In those statutes, the legislature has provided an incrementally graded set of standards for determining the seriousness of different forms of robbery and has divided those standards into three groups third-degree robbery, second-degree robbery, and first-degree robbery.”
Stokeling v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 544 (2019). “21, §§ 797(1)-(3), 801 (2015); Ore. Rev. Stat. §§ 164.405(1)(a), 164.415(1)(b)-(c) (2017); 18 Pa.”
State v. Parkins, 211 P.3d 262 (Or. 2009). “For second-degree robbery, the elevating elements are either that the robber represents that he or she is armed with something that purports to be a dangerous or deadly weapon (ORS 164.405(1)(a)) or the robber is aided by another person actually present (ORS 164.”
State v. Rennells, 162 P.3d 1006 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “First, ORS 164.405 provides, in part: “(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.”
State v. Vance, 591 P.2d 355 (Or. 1979). “The difference between first degree and second degree robbery as defined in ORS 164.405 and ORS 164.415 appears to be whether defendant's weapon is actually deadly or only `purports to be dangerous or deadly.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405(1)(b) — 25 cases
State v. Rennells, 162 P.3d 1006 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “First, ORS 164.405 provides, in part: “(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.”
State v. White, 211 P.3d 248 (Or. 2009). “In those statutes, the legislature has provided an incrementally graded set of standards for determining the seriousness of different forms of robbery and has divided those standards into three groups third-degree robbery, second-degree robbery, and first-degree robbery.”
State v. Jackson, 157 P.3d 239 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “The defendant was convicted of second-degree robbery, and we affirmed the trial court’s denial of his motion for judgment of acquittal: “The term ‘aided by another person actually present’ as used in ORS 164.405 includes a person who is at hand, or within reach, sight or call,…”
State v. Gaines, 365 P.3d 1103 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “A grand jury indicted defendant for second-degree robbery under ORS 164.405 (1) (b) (a Class B felony) and second-degree theft under ORS 164.”
State v. Butterfield, 549 P.3d 545 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “6 Under ORS 164.405, “(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405(2) — 1 case
State v. Nolasco-lara, 274 P.3d 880 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405(l) — 1 case
State v. Clark, 615 P.2d 1044 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405(l)(a) — 18 cases
State v. White, 175 P.3d 504 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for two counts of second-degree robbery, ORS 164.405, arising out of an episode in which defendant, while shoplifting with another person, threatened one of the store’s employees by representing that he had a weapon.”
State v. White, 211 P.3d 248 (Or. 2009). “In those statutes, the legislature has provided an incrementally graded set of standards for determining the seriousness of different forms of robbery and has divided those standards into three groups third-degree robbery, second-degree robbery, and first-degree robbery.”
State v. Parkins, 211 P.3d 262 (Or. 2009). “For second-degree robbery, the elevating elements are either that the robber represents that he or she is armed with something that purports to be a dangerous or deadly weapon (ORS 164.405(1)(a)) or the robber is aided by another person actually present (ORS 164.”
State v. Burris, 348 P.3d 338 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “610(2); two counts of second-degree robbery with a firearm (Counts 2 and 3), ORS 164.405 and ORS 161.610(2); one count of unlawful use of a weapon with a firearm *515 (Count 4), ORS 166.”
State v. Cobb, 198 P.3d 978 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 164.405(l)(b) — 24 cases
State v. Morgan, 388 P.3d 1085 (Or. 2017). “In reviewing whether the evidence was sufficient to satisfy the legal requirements of ORS 164.405 (l)(b), the court deemed the relevant standard to be “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the state, any rational trier of fact could have found the…”
State v. Burris, 348 P.3d 338 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “610(2); two counts of second-degree robbery with a firearm (Counts 2 and 3), ORS 164.405 and ORS 161.610(2); one count of unlawful use of a weapon with a firearm *515 (Count 4), ORS 166.”
State v. Parkins, 211 P.3d 262 (Or. 2009). “For second-degree robbery, the elevating elements are either that the robber represents that he or she is armed with something that purports to be a dangerous or deadly weapon (ORS 164.405(1)(a)) or the robber is aided by another person actually present (ORS 164.”
State v. Rennells, 162 P.3d 1006 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “First, ORS 164.405 provides, in part: “(1) A person commits the crime of robbery in the second degree if the person violates ORS 164.”
State v. Morgan, 364 P.3d 690 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
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.