Offenses Against Public Order

ORS 166.735
Short title

  • construction


(1)

ORS 166.715 (Definitions for ORS 166.715 to 166.735) to 166.735 (Short title) may be cited as the Oregon Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act.

(2)

The provisions of ORS 166.715 (Definitions for ORS 166.715 to 166.735) to 166.735 (Short title) shall be liberally construed to effectuate its remedial purposes. [1981 c.769 §§1,7; 1983 c.715 §4]
_______________
§§ 166.715 to 166.735

Notes of Decisions

RICO statutes are not indefinite or vague. State v. Romig, 73 Or App 780, 700 P2d 293 (1985), Sup Ct review denied

Oregon RICO statutes should be interpreted consistently with federal RICO statute, on which Oregon statute is based. Ahern v. Gaussoin, 611 F Supp 1465 (1985)

Oregon RICO statute would be interpreted in same manner as parallel. Schnitzer v. Oppenheimer and Co., Inc., 633 F Supp 92 (1985)

Plaintiffs' assertions that defendant conducted a pattern of racketeering activity that included numerous instances of mail, wire and securities fraud was sufficient to state a claim under RICO. Securities Investor Protection Corp. v. Poirier, 653 F Supp 63 (1986)

These sections allow multiple convictions and consecutive sentences for racketeering and predicate offenses. State v. Blossom, 88 Or App 75, 744 P2d 281 (1987), Sup Ct review denied

Because Oregon statute was modeled after federal statutes, 18 U.S.C. 1961 to 1968, federal cases interpreting federal statute are persuasive in interpreting intent of Oregon legislature. State v. Blossom, 88 Or App 75, 744 P2d 281 (1987), Sup Ct review denied

Investment companies' failure to adequately supervise their officer or agent could impose liability for secondary violations of securities laws. Pincetich v. Jeanfreau, 699 F Supp 1469 (D. Or. 1988)

Law Review Citations

18 WLR 1 (1982)

Chapter 166

Law Review Citations

51 OLR 427-637 (1972); 69 OLR 169 (1990)


Source

Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021