(1) In any prosecution under ORS § 163.355, 163.365, 163.385, 163.395, 163.415, 163.425, 163.427 or 163.435 in which the victim’s lack of consent was due solely to incapacity to consent by reason of being less than a specified age, it is a defense that the actor was less than three years older than the victim at the time of the alleged offense.

Ask a criminal law question, get an answer ASAP!
Click here to chat with a criminal defense lawyer and protect your rights.

(2) In any prosecution under ORS § 163.408, when the object used to commit the unlawful sexual penetration was the hand or any part thereof of the actor and in which the victim’s lack of consent was due solely to incapacity to consent by reason of being less than a specified age, it is a defense that the actor was less than three years older than the victim at the time of the alleged offense.

(3) In any prosecution under ORS § 163.445 in which the victim’s lack of consent was due solely to incapacity to consent by reason of being less than a specified age, it is a defense that the actor was less than three years older than the victim at the time of the alleged offense if the victim was at least 15 years of age at the time of the alleged offense. [1971 c.743 § 108; 1991 c.386 § 3; 1991 c.830 § 4; 1999 c.626 § 24; amendments by 1999 c.626 § 45 repealed by 2001 c.884 § 1]