City of Portland v. Jackson
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
*145PETERSON, J.
The issue in this case is this: When a state statute that forbids public exposure of genitalia has as an element “the intent of arousing the sexual desire of the person or another person,” and a defendant is prosecuted under a city ordinance that forbids public exposure of genitalia, regardless of the defendant’s culpable mental state, is the city ordinance in conflict with the statute and therefore invalid under the “home rule” provision of the Oregon Constitution, Article XI, section 2? We hold that the city ordinance is not invalid.
Defendant was charged with a crime, “indecent…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- City of La Grande v. Public Employes Retirement BoardOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- City of La Grande v. Public Employes Retirement BoardOregon Supreme Court · 1978
- Rose v. Port of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1917
- City of Portland v. DollarhideOregon Supreme Court · 1986
- Landreth v. GladdenOregon Supreme Court · 1958
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Doe v. Medford School District 549CCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- Owen v. City of PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 2021
- Ashland Drilling, Inc. v. Jackson CountyCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Dietter v. DietterConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
- Thunderbird Mobile Club, LLC v. City of WilsonvilleCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2010
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.