Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.535 (2026)

Definitions applicable to obtaining contents of communications

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

      165.535 Definitions applicable to obtaining contents of communications. As used in ORS 41.910, 133.723, 133.724, 165.540 and 165.545:

      (1) “Conversation” means the transmission between two or more persons of an oral communication which is not a telecommunication or a radio communication, and includes a communication occurring through a video conferencing program.

      (2) “Person” has the meaning given that term in ORS 174.100 and includes:

      (a) Public officials and law enforcement officers of:

      (A) The state and of a county, municipal corporation or any other political subdivision of the state; and

      (B) A police department established by a university under ORS 352.121 or 353.125; and

      (b) Authorized tribal police officers as defined in ORS 181A.940.

      (3)(a) “Radio communication” means the transmission by radio or other wireless methods of writing, signs, signals, pictures and sounds of all kinds, including all instrumentalities, facilities, equipment and services (including, among other things, the receipt, forwarding and delivering of communications) incidental to such transmission.

      (b) “Radio communication” does not include a communication occurring through a video conferencing program.

      (4)(a) “Telecommunication” means the transmission of writing, signs, signals, pictures and sounds of all kinds by aid of wire, cable or other similar connection between the points of origin and reception of such transmission, including all instrumentalities, facilities, equipment and services (including, among other things, the receipt, forwarding and delivering of communications) incidental to such transmission.

      (b) “Telecommunication” does not include a communication occurring through a video conferencing program.

      (5) “Video conferencing program” means software or an application for a computer or cellular telephone that allows two or more persons to communicate via simultaneous video transmission. [1955 c.675 §1; 1959 c.681 §1; 1983 c.740 §34; 2011 c.644 §§25,67,74; 2013 c.180 §§27,28; 2015 c.174 §13; 2021 c.357 §1]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: State v. Fleetwood, 16 P.3d 503 (Or. 2000).
State v. Fleetwood, 16 P.3d 503 (Or. 2000). · cites it 9× “” 7 ORS 165.535 provides, in part: “As used in ORS 41.”
State v. Evensen, 447 P.3d 23 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “7 The legislature also amended ORS 165.535 (1959) to add a definition for the term "conversation," used in newly added paragraph (c) of ORS 165.”
State v. Jones, 121 P.3d 657 (Or. 2005). · cites it 6× “” ORS 165.535 provides, in part: “As used in ORS 41.”
Proj. Veritas v. Michael Schmidt, 72 F.4th 1043 (9th Cir. 2023). · cites it 4× “” Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.535 (1). Because this section explicitly applies to the recording of a video conference and bars individuals from obtaining a conversation “by means of any device,” it applies to both audio and video recordings of a conversation.”
State v. Wischnofske, 878 P.2d 1130 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “The trial court held that defendant’s statements were not “conversation” under ORS 165.535(1), because he did not transmit or attempt to transmit information to anyone else.”
State v. Rainey, 431 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “"(c) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation…”
State v. Carston, 913 P.2d 709 (Or. 1996). · cites it 4× ““Person” includes the state, see ORS 165.535(2) (defining “person” for the purposes of ORS 165.”
State v. Armstrong, 547 P.2d 170 (Or. Ct. App. 1976). “” ORS 165.535(1). 2 "Evidence of the contents of any * * * conversation obtained: "(1) By violation of ORS 165.”
State v. Carston, 891 P.2d 1366 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “1 ORS 165.535 provides the following definitions: “(3) ‘Radio communication’ means the transmission by radio or other *500 wireless methods of writing, signs, signals, pictures and sounds of all kinds, including all instrumentalities, facilities, equipment and services…”
State v. Miller, 634 P.2d 1361 (Or. Ct. App. 1981). “Error is not assigned to the admission of the exhibits or the testimony about the blasting caps found in defendant’s apartment, so the wording of the opening statement, whatever it actually was, was not prejudicial. The trial court admitted police bureau tape recordings of the…”
State v. Maffia, 600 P.2d 446 (Or. Ct. App. 1979). “545(1) provides: "Nothing in ORS 165.535, 165.540 and this section, shall be construed as preventing fire or police governmental entities from recording, replaying or broadcasting telephonic or radio messages that directly concern police or fire operation at the telephone or…”
Proj. Veritas v. Michael Schmidt (9th Cir. 2025). “” Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.535 (1). 5 Project Veritas clarified at oral argument that it does not challenge the prohibition on eavesdropping.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.535(1) — 8 cases
State v. Fleetwood, 16 P.3d 503 (Or. 2000). “” 7 ORS 165.535 provides, in part: “As used in ORS 41.”
State v. Evensen, 447 P.3d 23 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “7 The legislature also amended ORS 165.535 (1959) to add a definition for the term "conversation," used in newly added paragraph (c) of ORS 165.”
State v. Jones, 121 P.3d 657 (Or. 2005). “” ORS 165.535 provides, in part: “As used in ORS 41.”
State v. Wischnofske, 878 P.2d 1130 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “The trial court held that defendant’s statements were not “conversation” under ORS 165.535(1), because he did not transmit or attempt to transmit information to anyone else.”
State v. Rainey, 431 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). “"(c) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.535(2) — 1 case
State v. Carston, 913 P.2d 709 (Or. 1996). ““Person” includes the state, see ORS 165.535(2) (defining “person” for the purposes of ORS 165.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.535(3) — 3 cases
State v. Evensen, 447 P.3d 23 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “7 The legislature also amended ORS 165.535 (1959) to add a definition for the term "conversation," used in newly added paragraph (c) of ORS 165.”
State v. Jones, 121 P.3d 657 (Or. 2005). “” ORS 165.535 provides, in part: “As used in ORS 41.”
State v. Carston, 913 P.2d 709 (Or. 1996). ““Person” includes the state, see ORS 165.535(2) (defining “person” for the purposes of ORS 165.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 165.535(4) — 2 cases
State v. Fleetwood, 16 P.3d 503 (Or. 2000). “” 7 ORS 165.535 provides, in part: “As used in ORS 41.”
State v. Evensen, 447 P.3d 23 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “7 The legislature also amended ORS 165.535 (1959) to add a definition for the term "conversation," used in newly added paragraph (c) of ORS 165.”
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.