K. R. v. Erazo

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Civil Stalking Protective Order
  • Date Filed: 03-14-2012
  • Case #: A142110
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, J. for the Court; Haselton, P.J.; and Armstrong, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

For a stalking protective order, ORS 30.866 requires two or more contacts that will cause objectively reasonable fear and, where the contact is speech, it must be a threat that invokes imminent fear.

Erazo appeals a stalking protective order (SPO) entered against him. Erazo and K.R. shop for books in the same store, and the extent of their interactions are in the book section. K.R. petitioned for the SPO because she claims 1) Erazo told her to be afraid of him, and 2) he "slugged" her. Erazo argues that these instances did not meet the requirements of ORS 30.866, under which the SPO was issued. ORS 30.866 requires two or more instances of unwanted contact, which give a person an objectively reasonable fear. If the contact involves speech, then it must be a serious threat. The Court of Appeals found that Erazo's conduct did not meet the statutory requirements under ORS 30.866; there was only one contact. Reversed.

Advanced Search