Violations and Fines

ORS 153.108
Effect of judgment


Notwithstanding ORS 131.505 (Definitions for ORS 131.505 to 131.525) to 131.535 (Proceedings not constituting acquittal), if a person commits both a crime and a violation as part of the same criminal episode, the prosecution for one offense shall not bar the subsequent prosecution for the other. However, evidence of the first conviction shall not be admissible in any subsequent prosecution for the other offense.


Notwithstanding ORS 43.130 (Judicial orders that are conclusive) and 43.160 (What determined by former judgment), a plea, finding or judgment in a violation proceeding, or the fact that a violation proceeding has been brought against a defendant, may not be used for the purpose of res judicata or collateral estoppel, or be admitted as evidence in any civil proceeding. [1999 c.1051 §27; 2011 c.597 §29]

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statute (Ors 153.810)

Crime and violation do not need to be charged in same charging instrument. State v. Garnier, 171 Or App 564, 16 P3d 1175 (2000)

In General

Where prosecuting attorney elects to treat misdemeanor as Class A violation, subject to constitutional constraints, person committed violation for purposes of determining whether person may subsequently be prosecuted for crime that was part of same criminal episode. State v. Page, 200 Or App 55, 113 P3d 447 (2005), Sup Ct review denied; State v. Hewitt, 206 Or App 680, 138 P3d 873 (2006)

Separate prosecution for violation is permissible even if violation is lesser included offense to prosecuted crime. State v. Warner, 200 Or App 65, 112 P3d 464 (2005), aff'd 342 Or 361, 153 P3d 674 (2007)


Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021