Oregon v. Ryan
Annotate this CaseThis case tested the limits of a defendant's free speech rights under Article I, 3 section 8, of the Oregon Constitution, and the his violation of a protective order. The victim was an editor with the Portland Tribune, a weekly newspaper. In 2005, the newspaper sponsored a social event to which the public was invited. Defendant John Ryan attended the event, and soon afterward, Defendant began writing to the victim. Defendant violated the terms of a stalking protective order issued against him by contacting the victim through a third party and was subsequently found guilty by a jury of two counts of violating ORS 163.750. The Court of Appeals reversed Defendant's convictions. That court reasoned that Article I, section 8, required that ORS 163.750 be judicially narrowed to require "an unequivocal threat of the sort that makes it objectively reasonable for the victim to believe that he or she is being threatened with imminent and serious physical harm," and so the State failed to meet its burden of proof on both counts. On review, the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed Defendant's conviction: "because defendant's communications with the victim were already prohibited by the stalking protective order, the state was not required by Article I, section 8, to prove that defendant had communicated an unequivocal threat to the victim."
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.