Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220 (2026)

Unlawful use of weapon

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

      166.220 Unlawful use of weapon. (1) A person commits the crime of unlawful use of a weapon if the person:

      (a) Attempts to use unlawfully against another, or carries or possesses with intent to use unlawfully against another, any dangerous or deadly weapon as defined in ORS 161.015; or

      (b) Intentionally discharges a firearm, blowgun, bow and arrow, crossbow or explosive device within the city limits of any city or within residential areas within urban growth boundaries at or in the direction of any person, building, structure or vehicle within the range of the weapon without having legal authority for such discharge.

      (2) This section does not apply to:

      (a) Police officers or military personnel in the lawful performance of their official duties;

      (b) Persons lawfully defending life or property as provided in ORS 161.219;

      (c) Persons discharging firearms, blowguns, bows and arrows, crossbows or explosive devices upon public or private shooting ranges, shooting galleries or other areas designated and built for the purpose of target shooting;

      (d) Persons lawfully engaged in hunting in compliance with rules and regulations adopted by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife; or

      (e) An employee of the United States Department of Agriculture, acting within the scope of employment, discharging a firearm in the course of the lawful taking of wildlife.

      (3) Unlawful use of a weapon is a Class C felony. [Amended by 1975 c.700 §1; 1985 c.543 §1; 1991 c.797 §1; 2009 c.556 §5]

 

      166.230 [Repealed by 1979 c.779 §7]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 394 cases (158 in the last 5 years), 1968–2026 · leading case: State v. Ziska / Garza, 334 P.3d 964 (Or. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Ziska / Garza, 334 P.3d 964 (Or. 2014). · cites it 22× “According to defendants, the disputed wording of ORS 166.220 (l)(a) originated in 1917 — a time during which, defendants contend, the legislature did not make mere threats unlawful.”
State v. Linthwaite, 665 P.2d 863 (Or. 1983). · cites it 21× “He asserted: “The Defendant has been convicted of four counts of violating ORS 166.220. The Defendant submits that there has been but one criminal act and, therefore, there should only be *166 one criminal sentence.”
State v. McAuliffe, 366 P.3d 1206 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 9× “ORS 166.220 defines the crime of unlawful use of a weapon (UUW).”
April Sabbe v. Washington Cnty Bd of Comm'rs, 84 F.4th 807 (9th Cir. 2023). · cites it 6× “The record does not conclusively establish otherwise, but Defendants maintain that they had reason to suspect that Sabbe fired a weapon unlawfully (see Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220 ).15 The evidence that Sabbe may have discharged his rifle was Lloyd Wetzel’s call and Officer…”
State v. Gray, 249 P.3d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 18× “She survived, and defendant was convicted of multiple offenses, including, as relevant to this appeal, two counts of unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220(1). 1 Defendant raises three assignments of error, the first of which we reject without discussion.”
State v. Alvarez, 246 P.3d 26 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “Unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220, provides, in part: “(1) A person commits the crime of unlawful use of a weapon if the person: “(a) Attempts to use unlawfully against another, or carries or possesses with intent to use unlawfully against another, any dangerous or deadly…”
State v. Smith, 363 P.3d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 11× “Defendant argues that the trial court wrongly interpreted the meaning of the word “use” in ORS 166.220(1) (a), contending that a person does not unlawfully “use” a weapon by merely threatening to use it against another person.”
State v. Flores, 313 P.3d 378 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 5× “As explained below, these awkward and somewhat redundant crime titles result from the fact that unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220, 1 and felon in possession of a firearm, ORS 166.”
State v. Cufaude, 244 P.3d 382 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 7× “185, and unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220. He appeals, raising two assignments of error, the first of which we reject without discussion.”
State v. Carrillo, 466 P.3d 1023 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “Defendant was convicted of five counts of unlawful use of a weapon (UUW), ORS 166.220; six counts of men- acing, ORS 163.”
State v. Ziska, 288 P.3d 1012 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 27× “Defendant appeals his conviction for unlawfully using a weapon, ORS 166.220, assigning error to trial court rulings that, together, constituted denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal.”
State v. Shields, 482 P.3d 784 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 5× “Specifically, the state established that defendant has two prior convic- tions for first-degree criminal damage to property, OCGA § 16-7-22(a), which it argued corresponds to unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220, or recklessly endangering another person, ORS 163.”
Show all 394 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(1) — 29 cases
State v. Linthwaite, 665 P.2d 863 (Or. 1983). “He asserted: “The Defendant has been convicted of four counts of violating ORS 166.220. The Defendant submits that there has been but one criminal act and, therefore, there should only be *166 one criminal sentence.”
State v. Cufaude, 244 P.3d 382 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “185, and unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220. He appeals, raising two assignments of error, the first of which we reject without discussion.”
State v. Kessler, 686 P.2d 345 (Or. 1984).
State v. Gray, 249 P.3d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “She survived, and defendant was convicted of multiple offenses, including, as relevant to this appeal, two counts of unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220(1). 1 Defendant raises three assignments of error, the first of which we reject without discussion.”
State v. Crawford, 171 P.3d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(1)(2) — 1 case
State v. Linthwaite, 665 P.2d 863 (Or. 1983). “He asserted: “The Defendant has been convicted of four counts of violating ORS 166.220. The Defendant submits that there has been but one criminal act and, therefore, there should only be *166 one criminal sentence.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(1)(A) — 1 case
State v. Gonzales, 423 P.3d 149 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(1)(a) — 40 cases
State v. Labossiere, 477 P.3d 1 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Tinoco-Camarena, 489 P.3d 572 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
State v. Stone, 527 P.3d 800 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
State v. Maskell, 560 P.3d 711 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Snyder, 543 P.3d 749 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(1)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Carrillo, 466 P.3d 1023 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “Defendant was convicted of five counts of unlawful use of a weapon (UUW), ORS 166.220; six counts of men- acing, ORS 163.”
In re Graeff, 485 P.3d 258 (Or. 2021).
State v. Wilson, 552 P.3d 730 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Gray, 249 P.3d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(2) — 5 cases
State v. Linthwaite, 665 P.2d 863 (Or. 1983). “He asserted: “The Defendant has been convicted of four counts of violating ORS 166.220. The Defendant submits that there has been but one criminal act and, therefore, there should only be *166 one criminal sentence.”
State v. Washington, 543 P.2d 1058 (Or. 1975).
State v. Essig, 571 P.2d 170 (Or. Ct. App. 1977).
State v. Nossaman, 666 P.2d 1351 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
State v. Washington, 543 P.2d 1058 (Or. 1975).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(2)(b) — 1 case
State v. Taylor, 895 P.2d 357 (Or. Ct. App. 1995).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(3) — 2 cases
State v. Strong, 598 P.2d 1254 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
State v. Diaz-Guillen, 261 P.3d 80 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(Ilia) — 1 case
State v. Smith, 363 P.3d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “Defendant argues that the trial court wrongly interpreted the meaning of the word “use” in ORS 166.220(1) (a), contending that a person does not unlawfully “use” a weapon by merely threatening to use it against another person.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(l)(a) — 23 cases
State v. Ziska / Garza, 334 P.3d 964 (Or. 2014). “According to defendants, the disputed wording of ORS 166.220 (l)(a) originated in 1917 — a time during which, defendants contend, the legislature did not make mere threats unlawful.”
State v. McAuliffe, 366 P.3d 1206 (Or. Ct. App. 2016). “ORS 166.220 defines the crime of unlawful use of a weapon (UUW).”
State v. Alvarez, 246 P.3d 26 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “Unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220, provides, in part: “(1) A person commits the crime of unlawful use of a weapon if the person: “(a) Attempts to use unlawfully against another, or carries or possesses with intent to use unlawfully against another, any dangerous or deadly…”
State v. Gray, 249 P.3d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “She survived, and defendant was convicted of multiple offenses, including, as relevant to this appeal, two counts of unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220(1). 1 Defendant raises three assignments of error, the first of which we reject without discussion.”
State v. Smith, 363 P.3d 514 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). “Defendant argues that the trial court wrongly interpreted the meaning of the word “use” in ORS 166.220(1) (a), contending that a person does not unlawfully “use” a weapon by merely threatening to use it against another person.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.220(l)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Gray, 249 P.3d 544 (Or. Ct. App. 2011). “She survived, and defendant was convicted of multiple offenses, including, as relevant to this appeal, two counts of unlawful use of a weapon, ORS 166.220(1). 1 Defendant raises three assignments of error, the first of which we reject without discussion.”
State v. Crawford, 171 P.3d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Jones, 362 P.3d 899 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Anderson, 883 P.2d 910 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
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.