ORS 163.735
Citation; form


(1)

Upon a complaint initiated as provided in ORS 163.744 (Initiation of action seeking citation), a law enforcement officer shall issue a citation ordering the person to appear in court within three judicial days and show cause why the court should not enter a court’s stalking protective order when the officer has probable cause to believe that:

(a)

The person intentionally, knowingly or recklessly engages in repeated and unwanted contact with the other person or a member of that person’s immediate family or household thereby alarming or coercing the other person;

(b)

It is objectively reasonable for a person in the victim’s situation to have been alarmed or coerced by the contact; and

(c)

The repeated and unwanted contact causes the victim reasonable apprehension regarding the personal safety of the victim or a member of the victim’s immediate family or household.

(2)

The Department of State Police shall develop and distribute a form for the citation. The form shall be uniform throughout the state and shall contain substantially the following in addition to any other material added by the department:
______________________________________________________________________________
OFFICER:___________________
AGENCY:___________________
PETITIONER:__________________
PERSON TO BE PROTECTED IF OTHER THAN PETITIONER:______________
RESPONDENT:_________________
On behalf of petitioner, I affirm that I am a law enforcement officer in the State of Oregon.
You, the respondent, must appear at _______________ (name and location of court at which respondent is to appear) on ________ (date and time respondent is to appear in court). At this hearing, you must be prepared to establish why the court should not enter a court’s stalking protective order which shall be for an unlimited duration unless limited by law or court order. If you fail to appear at this hearing, the court shall immediately issue a warrant for your arrest and shall enter a court’s stalking protective order.
If the court issues a stalking protective order at this hearing, and while the protective order is in effect, federal law may prohibit you from:
Traveling across state lines or tribal land lines with the intent to violate this order and then violating this order.
Causing the person protected by the order, if the person is your spouse or intimate partner, to cross state lines or tribal land lines for your purpose of violating the order.
Possessing, receiving, shipping or transporting any firearm or firearm ammunition.
Whether or not a stalking protective order is in effect, federal law may prohibit you from:
Traveling across state lines or tribal land lines with the intent to injure or harass another person and during, or because of, that travel placing that person in reasonable fear of death or serious bodily injury to that person or to a member of that person’s immediate family.
Traveling across state lines or tribal land lines with the intent to injure your spouse or intimate partner and then intentionally committing a crime of violence causing bodily injury to that person.
Causing your spouse or intimate partner to travel across state lines or tribal land lines if your intent is to cause bodily injury to that person or if the travel results in your causing bodily injury to that person.
It has been alleged that you have alarmed or coerced the petitioner, or person to be protected if other than the petitioner. If you engage in contact that alarms or coerces the petitioner, or person to be protected if other than the petitioner, in violation of ORS 163.732 (Stalking), you may be arrested for the crime of stalking.
Date: ________Time: ________
Signed: _______________
(Respondent)
Signed: _______________
(Law enforcement officer).
______________________________________________________________________________ [1993 c.626 §3; 1995 c.353 §3; 1999 c.1052 §10]
Note: See note under 163.730 (Definitions for ORS 30.866 and 163.730 to 163.750).
§§ 163.730 to 163.750

Notes of Decisions

Requirement in force prior to 1995 amendments that conduct be “without legitimate purpose” was unconstitutionally vague. State v. Norris-Romine/Finley, 134 Or App 204, 894 P2d 1221 (1995), Sup Ct review denied

Chapter 163

Law Review Citations

51 OLR 427-637 (1972)


Source
Last accessed
May. 15, 2020