Legal Opinion
State v. Chakerian
Oregon Supreme Court
Decided June 12, 1997No. C93-07-34971; CA A83155 (Control); C93-07-34975; CA A83173; C93-07-34970; CA A83174; C93-07-34972; CA A83175; C93-07-34973, CA A83175; SC S42481PublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGillette, J.
In this criminal case, the issue is the facial constitutional validity of ORS 166.015, Oregon’s “riot” statute, which provides:
“(1) A person commits the crime of riot if while participating with five or more other persons the person engages in tumultuous and violent conduct and thereby intentionally or recklessly creates a grave risk of causing public alarm.
“(2) Riot is a Class C felony.”
We hold that the statute is not facially unconstitutional in any respect asserted by defendants.
BACKGROUND
In a single indictment, the state charged defendants jointly, under ORS 166.015, with one count of…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- Coates v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- State v. RobertsonOregon Supreme Court · 1982
- State v. FarrarOregon Supreme Court · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Delgado v. SoudersOregon Supreme Court · 2002
- State v. BarnesOregon Supreme Court · 1999
- State Ex Rel. Oregon Health Sciences University v. HaasOregon Supreme Court · 1997
- Young v. StateCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1999
- State v. AusmusOregon Supreme Court · 2003
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.