165.055
Fraudulent use of a credit card.
(1) A person commits the crime of fraudulent use of a credit card if, with
intent to injure or defraud, the person uses a credit card for the purpose of
obtaining property or services with knowledge that:
(a) The card is
stolen or forged;
(b) The card has
been revoked or canceled; or
(c) For any other
reason the use of the card is unauthorized by either the issuer or the person
to whom the credit card is issued.
(2) “Credit card”
means a card, booklet, credit card number or other identifying symbol or
instrument evidencing an undertaking to pay for property or services delivered
or rendered to or upon the order of a designated person or bearer.
(3) The value of single
credit card transactions may be added together if the transactions were
committed:
(a) Against
multiple victims within a 30-day period; or
(b) Against the
same victim within a 180-day period.
(4) Fraudulent
use of a credit card is:
(a) A Class A
misdemeanor if the aggregate total amount of property or services the person
obtains or attempts to obtain is less than $1,000.
(b) A Class C
felony if the aggregate total amount of property or services the person obtains
or attempts to obtain is $1,000 or more. [1971 c.743 §160; 1973 c.133 §7; 1987
c.907 §11; 1993 c.680 §26; 2009 c.16 §7]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
27
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1973–2025 · leading case:
State v. Haddon, 399 P.3d 458 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
State v. Haddon, 399 P.3d 458 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 5× “800 (Counts 1 and 2), two counts of fraudulent use of a credit card under ORS 165.055 (Counts 3 and 4), and one count of third-degree theft under ORS 164.”
State v. Barboe, 290 P.3d 833 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction, following a bench trial, for fraudulent use of a credit card, ORS 165.055. 1 He assigns error to his conviction under an aid-and-abet after-the-fact theory of criminal liability, arguing that the trial court erred in convicting him on…”
State v. Barton, 468 P.3d 510 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“800, and observing that, “[w]hether a suspect had a credit card in his hand is immaterial,” because “possession, in the context of the iden- tity theft statute, includes both actual and constructive possession”).”
State v. Stutte, 568 P.3d 247 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“See ORS 165.055 (a person commits the crime of fraudulent use of a credit card “if, with intent to injure or defraud, the person uses a credit card for the purpose of obtaining property or services with knowledge that” the card is stolen, forged, revoked, or canceled, or that…”
State v. Bowen, 380 P.3d 1054 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“ORS 165.055 addresses the specific act defendant committed when he swiped the stolen credit card to pay for items: “A person commits the crime of fraudulent use of a credit card if, with the intent to injure or defraud, the person uses a credit card for the purpose of obtaining…”
State v. Craig, 337 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“055; fraudulent use of a credit card, ORS 165.055(4)(b); and five counts of computer crime, ORS 164.”
State v. Mullen, 263 P.3d 1146 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“032 (forgery); ORS 165.055 (fraudulent use of a credit card); ORS 164.”
State v. Clark, 134 P.3d 1074 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“055; one count of fraudulent use of a credit card, ORS 165.055; and one count of unauthorized use of a vehicle, ORS 164.”
State v. Lark, 851 P.2d 1114 (Or. 1993).
“013, and credit card fraud, ORS 165.055) are subclassified according to the value of the property affected.”
State v. Blaney, 790 P.2d 549 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“ORS 165.055. The maximum sentence that he could have received was one year imprisonment.”
State v. Franke, 508 P.2d 454 (Or. Ct. App. 1973).
· cites it 3× “The trial court concluded that the legislature intended that ORS 165.055, the new credit card statute, should pre *281 empt the field of unlawful activity involving credit cards.”
State v. Hlady, 607 P.2d 733 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
“3 The officers clearly had probable cause to arrest defendant for the crime of fraudulent use of a credit card under ORS 165.055.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.055(1) — 1 case
State v. Haddon, 399 P.3d 458 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
“800 (Counts 1 and 2), two counts of fraudulent use of a credit card under ORS 165.055 (Counts 3 and 4), and one count of third-degree theft under ORS 164.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.055(1)(c) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.055(3)(a) — 1 case
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.055(4)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Craig, 337 Or. App. 38 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“055; fraudulent use of a credit card, ORS 165.055(4)(b); and five counts of computer crime, ORS 164.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.055(l)(a) — 1 case
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.