Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274 (2026)

Relief from prohibition against possessing or receiving firearm; fees

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

      166.274 Relief from prohibition against possessing or receiving firearm; fees. (1) Except as provided in subsection (11) of this section, a person barred from possessing or receiving a firearm may file a petition for relief from the bar in accordance with subsection (2) of this section if:

      (a) The person is barred from possessing a firearm under ORS 166.250 (1)(c)(A), (C) or (H) or 166.270; or

      (b) The person is barred from receiving a firearm under ORS 166.470 (1)(a) or (b) or, if the person has been convicted of a misdemeanor involving violence, ORS 166.470 (1)(g).

      (2) A petition for relief described in this section must be filed in the circuit court in the petitioner’s county of residence.

      (3) A person may apply once per calendar year for relief under the provisions of this section.

      (4)(a) A person petitioning for relief under this section shall serve a copy of the petition on:

      (A) The city chief of police if the court in which the petition is filed is located in a city; or

      (B) The sheriff of the county in which the court is located.

      (b) The copy of the petition shall be served on the chief of police or sheriff at the same time the petition is filed at the court.

      (5)(a) When a petition is denied, the judge shall cause that information to be entered into the Department of State Police computerized criminal history files.

      (b) When a petition is granted, the judge shall cause that information and a fingerprint card of the petitioner to be entered into the Department of State Police computerized criminal history files. If, after a petition is granted, the petitioner is arrested and convicted of a crime that would disqualify the petitioner from purchasing or possessing a firearm, the Department of State Police shall notify the court that granted relief under this section. The court shall review the order granting relief and determine whether to rescind the order. The Department of State Police may charge a reasonable fee, under ORS 192.324, for the entry and maintenance of information under this section.

      (6) Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 9.320, a party that is not a natural person, the state or any city, county, district or other political subdivision or public corporation in this state, without appearance by attorney, may appear as a party to an action under this section.

      (7) If the petitioner seeks relief from the bar on possessing or purchasing a firearm, relief shall be granted when the petitioner demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence, that the petitioner does not pose a threat to the safety of the public or the petitioner.

      (8) Petitions filed under this section shall be heard and disposed of within 15 judicial days of filing or as soon as is practicable thereafter, but not more than 30 days thereafter. The judge shall then make findings and conclusions and issue a judgment based on the findings and conclusions in accordance with the requirements of law.

      (9) A person filing a petition under this section must pay the filing fee established under ORS 21.135.

      (10)(a) Initial appeals of petitions shall be heard de novo.

      (b) Any party to a judgment under this subsection may appeal to the Court of Appeals in the same manner as for any other civil action.

      (c) If the governmental entity files an appeal under this subsection and does not prevail, it shall be ordered to pay the attorney fees for the prevailing party.

      (11) The court may not grant relief under this section to a person who:

      (a) Has been convicted of a person felony, as that term is defined in the rules of the Oregon Criminal Justice Commission, or the statutory counterpart to a person felony in any other jurisdiction, if the offense involved the use of a firearm or a deadly weapon as defined in ORS 161.015;

      (b) Has been convicted of an offense listed in ORS 137.700 or the statutory counterpart to an offense listed in ORS 137.700 in any other jurisdiction; or

      (c) Is currently serving a felony sentence as defined in ORS 10.030 or has served a felony sentence in the one-year period preceding the filing of the petition. [1989 c.839 §11; 1991 c.67 §37; 1993 c.732 §§3,4; 1995 c.518 §2; 1995 c.658 §88; 2009 c.499 §2; 2009 c.826 §§19,20; 2010 c.86 §§1,2,3; 2011 c.595 §§59,60; 2011 c.662 §§3,4; 2015 c.7 §§6,7; 2015 c.201 §4; 2015 c.497 §§5,6]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case: Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 538 P.3d 895 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 538 P.3d 895 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 28× “Marion County Circuit Court 21CV39064; A177996 538 P3d 895 Appellant petitioned for relief under ORS 166.274 from a state law prohib- iting him from possessing a firearm.”
Bentley v. Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 443 P.3d 743 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “*610 Petitioner appeals from a judgment that denied his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a firearm restriction resulting from a robbery conviction.”
State v. Stark, 307 P.3d 418 (Or. 2013). · cites it 4× “7 *11 The state identifies another statute, ORS 166.274, as relevant context for interpreting the phrase “the time of judgment” in ORS 177.”
State v. Burris, 518 P.3d 891 (Or. 2022). · cites it 5× “273 and ORS 166.274, which provide opportunities for individuals to petition for relief from certain bars on possessing a fire- arm contained in ORS 166.”
Hertz v. Clackamas Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 337 Or. App. 436 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 13× “Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a prohibition on possessing or purchasing firearms due to his prior felony conviction.”
State v. Giron-Cortez, 557 P.3d 505 (Or. 2024). “” ORS 166.274(7). The reason for defendant’s firearm prohibition is also relevant.”
Mohiadeen v. Washington Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 338 Or. App. 29 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 6× “273, ORS 166.274, ORS 166.293, and 18 USC 925(c)—all set forth specific procedures to obtain relief from a firearms disability.”
Hertz v. Clackamas Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 337 Or. App. 436 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 13× “Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a prohibition on possessing or purchasing firearms due to his prior felony conviction.”
State v. Owenby, 826 P.2d 51 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 3× “Although the statute imposes no time limit on the prohibition, ORS 166.274(6) 3 permits the person to obtain judicial relief from an order under ORS 426.”
State v. Shelnutt, 483 P.3d 53 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “” We further note that, although it is not discussed by the parties, one of the cross- referenced provisions in subparagraph (4)(b), ORS 166.274, allows a petitioner to seek relief from the ban if the petitioner “demonstrates, by clear and convincing evidence, that the…”
Mohiadeen v. Washington Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 338 Or. App. 29 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 6× “273, ORS 166.274, ORS 166.293, and 18 USC 925(c)—all set forth specific procedures to obtain relief from a firearms disability.”
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off. (Or. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 25× “Appellant petitioned for relief from the state statutory bar under ORS 166.274. Relying on Beecham v. United States, 511 US 368 , 114 S Ct 1669 , 128 L Ed 2d 383 (1994), the trial court determined that it lacked authority to grant the petition because appellant was con- victed…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(1) — 6 cases
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 538 P.3d 895 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Marion County Circuit Court 21CV39064; A177996 538 P3d 895 Appellant petitioned for relief under ORS 166.274 from a state law prohib- iting him from possessing a firearm.”
State v. Stark, 307 P.3d 418 (Or. 2013). “7 *11 The state identifies another statute, ORS 166.274, as relevant context for interpreting the phrase “the time of judgment” in ORS 177.”
State v. Burris, 518 P.3d 891 (Or. 2022). “273 and ORS 166.274, which provide opportunities for individuals to petition for relief from certain bars on possessing a fire- arm contained in ORS 166.”
Hertz v. Clackamas Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 337 Or. App. 436 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a prohibition on possessing or purchasing firearms due to his prior felony conviction.”
Hertz v. Clackamas Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 337 Or. App. 436 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a prohibition on possessing or purchasing firearms due to his prior felony conviction.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(1)(a) — 1 case
State v. Burris, 518 P.3d 891 (Or. 2022). “273 and ORS 166.274, which provide opportunities for individuals to petition for relief from certain bars on possessing a fire- arm contained in ORS 166.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(10)(a) — 6 cases
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 538 P.3d 895 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Marion County Circuit Court 21CV39064; A177996 538 P3d 895 Appellant petitioned for relief under ORS 166.274 from a state law prohib- iting him from possessing a firearm.”
Hertz v. Clackamas Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 337 Or. App. 436 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a prohibition on possessing or purchasing firearms due to his prior felony conviction.”
Gillin v. Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 505 P.3d 1104 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
Hertz v. Clackamas Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 337 Or. App. 436 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a prohibition on possessing or purchasing firearms due to his prior felony conviction.”
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off. (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Appellant petitioned for relief from the state statutory bar under ORS 166.274. Relying on Beecham v. United States, 511 US 368 , 114 S Ct 1669 , 128 L Ed 2d 383 (1994), the trial court determined that it lacked authority to grant the petition because appellant was con- victed…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(2) — 3 cases
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 538 P.3d 895 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Marion County Circuit Court 21CV39064; A177996 538 P3d 895 Appellant petitioned for relief under ORS 166.274 from a state law prohib- iting him from possessing a firearm.”
Stanley v. Myers, 369 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off. (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Appellant petitioned for relief from the state statutory bar under ORS 166.274. Relying on Beecham v. United States, 511 US 368 , 114 S Ct 1669 , 128 L Ed 2d 383 (1994), the trial court determined that it lacked authority to grant the petition because appellant was con- victed…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(6) — 1 case
State v. Owenby, 826 P.2d 51 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). “Although the statute imposes no time limit on the prohibition, ORS 166.274(6) 3 permits the person to obtain judicial relief from an order under ORS 426.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(7) — 11 cases
Newman v. Marion Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 538 P.3d 895 (Or. Ct. App. 2023). “Marion County Circuit Court 21CV39064; A177996 538 P3d 895 Appellant petitioned for relief under ORS 166.274 from a state law prohib- iting him from possessing a firearm.”
State v. Giron-Cortez, 557 P.3d 505 (Or. 2024). “” ORS 166.274(7). The reason for defendant’s firearm prohibition is also relevant.”
Hertz v. Clackamas Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 337 Or. App. 436 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “Petitioner appeals from a judgment denying his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a prohibition on possessing or purchasing firearms due to his prior felony conviction.”
Bentley v. Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 443 P.3d 743 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “*610 Petitioner appeals from a judgment that denied his petition under ORS 166.274 for relief from a firearm restriction resulting from a robbery conviction.”
State v. Stark, 307 P.3d 418 (Or. 2013). “7 *11 The state identifies another statute, ORS 166.274, as relevant context for interpreting the phrase “the time of judgment” in ORS 177.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(9)(a) — 1 case
Stanley v. Myers, 369 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 166.274(9)(b) — 1 case
Stanley v. Myers, 369 P.3d 75 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
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.