Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 179.495 (2026)

Disclosure of written accounts of adult in custody; penalty

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

      179.495 Disclosure of written accounts of adult in custody; penalty. (1) Written accounts of the adults in custody of any Department of Corrections institution as defined in ORS 421.005, maintained in the institution by the officers or employees of the institution who are authorized to maintain written accounts within the official scope of their duties, are not subject to disclosure unless the disclosure is permitted or authorized by the Department of Corrections in compliance with ORS 179.505 (3), (4), (6), (7), (9), (11), (12), (14), (15), (16) or (17) or 179.508 or upon order of a court of competent jurisdiction. The restriction contained in this section does not apply to disclosure of written accounts made under ORS 179.505 (3) with the authorization of the individual or a personal representative of the individual.

      (2) Except as authorized under subsection (1) of this section, any person who discloses or any person who knowingly obtains information from a written account referred to in subsection (1) of this section commits a Class B violation.

      (3) As used in this section, “disclosure,” “personal representative” and “written account” have the meanings given those terms in ORS 179.505. [1955 c.452 §1; 1969 c.597 §44; 1973 c.736 §3; 1977 c.812 §5; 1987 c.320 §133; 1991 c.807 §2; 1999 c.1051 §165; 2003 c.14 §76; 2003 c.88 §1; 2005 c.498 §4; 2019 c.213 §52]

 

      179.500 [Repealed by 1969 c.597 §281]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1972–2025 · leading case: Turner v. Reed, 538 P.2d 373 (Or. Ct. App. 1975).
Turner v. Reed, 538 P.2d 373 (Or. Ct. App. 1975). “490(1), we conclude our authority is commensurate with that granted to the circuit court, and therefore review de novo on the record.”
Papadopoulos v. State Bd. of Higher Educ., 494 P.2d 260 (Or. Ct. App. 1972). “410 (grand jury indictments prior to arrest) ORS 179.495 (medical records of patients at state institutions) ORS 181.”
Maimon v. Bd. of Parole & Post-Prison Supervision, 909 P.2d 874 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “” 1 *332 “Notwithstanding the provisions of ORS 179.495, prior to aparóle hearing or other personal interview, each prisoner shall have access to the written materials which the board shall consider with respect to the release of the prisoner on parole, with the exception of…”
Byers v. Vester (D. Or. 2020). · cites it 2× “Or. Rev. Stat. § 179.495 . Plaintiff alleges physical and psychological injury, and he has placed his physical and mental health squarely at issue.”
Van Wagner v. Peters (D. Or. 2025). · cites it 2× “ODOC objects that the information entered on those screens are protected medical and health information that ODOC is barred from producing under ORS 179.495 and ORS 179.505. ODOC Reply at 3.”
Dept. of Human Servs. v. M. A. H. (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “558(2)(b) (same); ORS 179.495(1) (same). 3 The jurisdictional bases also included that mother was “the subject of a criminal investigation for alleged sexual abuse of [C] and alleged sexual exploita- tion of children” and was “unable to be a custodial resource.”
Coman v. Corr. Dep't, 960 P.2d 383 (Or. 1998). · cites it 2× “ORS 179.495 provides, in part: “(1) Medical case histories, clinical records, X-rays, treatment charts, progress reports and other similar written accounts of the inmates of any Department of Corrections institution * * *, maintained in such institution by the officers or…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 179.495(1) — 1 case
Dept. of Human Servs. v. M. A. H. (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “558(2)(b) (same); ORS 179.495(1) (same). 3 The jurisdictional bases also included that mother was “the subject of a criminal investigation for alleged sexual abuse of [C] and alleged sexual exploita- tion of children” and was “unable to be a custodial resource.”
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.