Frequenting a place where controlled substances are used
Source:
Section 167.222 — Frequenting a place where controlled substances are used, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors167.html
.
Notes of Decisions
Evidence that defendant entered residence five minutes before police arrived, for purpose of negotiating repair of car, that large quantity of hashish was contained in covered boxes on table within residence, and that defendant suspected that plastic bag on table did contain drugs, was insufficient to show that defendant knowingly remained in a place resorted to by drug users. State v. West, 31 Or App 1177, 572 P2d 349 (1977)
This section, in prohibiting “frequenting a place where controlled substances are used” is not unconstitutionally vague under U.S. or Oregon Constitution. State v. Pyritz, 90 Or App 601, 752 P2d 1310 (1988)
Evidence that defendant was asleep in his underwear on second floor of house, that house was heavily fortified, that drugs had been sold in house and that another person was found flushing drugs down toilet on first floor while defendant slept upstairs constituted probable cause that defendant remained in house and permitted drug use on premises within meaning of this section. State v. Anderson, 95 Or App 178, 768 P2d 427 (1989)
Frequenting place where controlled substances are used is not lesser included offense of unlawful possession of controlled substance. State v. Martz, 103 Or App 105, 795 P2d 616 (1990)
Commission of violation requires that premises were location where principal or substantial purpose was commercial sale or use of illegal drugs and that defendant had legal authority over location where illegal drugs were sold, had actual knowledge of sale, and permitted sale. State v. Van Osdol, 290 Or App 902, 417 P3d 488 (2018)