Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

ORS 166.090

Applied in 26 court decisions — leading case 184 Or. App. 505 - State v. Shields (2002)

Most recently applied in 343 Or. App. 671 - State v. Flores (October 2025)

1987 c.806 §2; 1999 c.115 §1; 2005 c.752 §1

How often courts cite this section

1990200020102020202530
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

(1) A telephone caller commits the crime of telephonic harassment if the caller intentionally harasses or annoys another person:

(a) By causing the telephone of the other person to ring, such caller having no communicative purpose;

(b) By causing such other person’s telephone to ring, knowing that the caller has been forbidden from so doing by a person exercising lawful authority over the receiving telephone; or

(c) By sending to, or leaving at, the other person’s telephone a text message, voice mail or any other message, knowing that the caller has been forbidden from so doing by a person exercising lawful authority over the receiving telephone.

(2) Telephonic harassment is a Class B misdemeanor.

(3) It is an affirmative defense to a charge of violating subsection (1) of this section that the caller is a debt collector, as defined in ORS 646.639, who engaged in the conduct proscribed by subsection (1) of this section while attempting to collect a debt. The affirmative defense created by this subsection does not apply if the debt collector committed the unlawful collection practice described in ORS 646.639 (2)(a) while engaged in the conduct proscribed by subsection (1) of this section.

Official source: Oregon State Legislature. Reproduced from public-domain Oregon statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.