482 P.3d 167
Or. Ct. App.2021Background
- Defendant Heaston was convicted of third-degree sexual abuse and recklessly endangering another and sentenced to probation that included all general conditions in ORS 137.540.
- ORS 137.540(1)(b) prohibits a probationer from using or possessing “controlled substances except pursuant to a medical prescription.”
- A probation officer reported that Heaston admitted using marijuana while on probation; Heaston conceded use but argued that marijuana is not a “controlled substance” under ORS 137.540(1)(b) post‑SB 302.
- The trial court found a probation violation under ORS 137.540(1)(b); Heaston appealed the statutory‑interpretation issue.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed text, statutory context, and SB 302’s legislative history and concluded that “controlled substances” in ORS 137.540(1)(b) does not include marijuana; it reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the phrase “controlled substances” in ORS 137.540(1)(b) includes marijuana | ORS 475.005(6) (which excludes cannabis) applies only to chapter 475 and not to ORS 137.540; ORS 137.542(2) shows the legislature treated medical marijuana specially under probation law | SB 302 removed cannabis from the Uniform Controlled Substances Act and added “cannabis” in many statutes (including ORS 137.540(1)(c)) but did not add it to (1)(b), so the legislature intended to exclude marijuana from (1)(b) | Court of Appeals: “controlled substances” in ORS 137.540(1)(b) does not include marijuana; trial court erred; reversed and remanded |
Key Cases Cited
- PGE v. Bureau of Labor & Industries, 317 Or 606 (statutory interpretation starts with text)
- TriMet v. Amalgamated Transit Union Local 757, 362 Or 484 (use text, context, legislative history to ascertain intent)
- Rider v. Carranza, 306 Or App 616 (statutory interpretation reviewed for legal error)
- State v. Ofodrinwa, 353 Or 507 (later amendments can control meaning)
- State v. Stamper, 197 Or App 413 (avoid surplusage in statutory construction)
- Village at Main Street Phase II v. Dept. of Rev., 356 Or 164 (assume consistent meanings in related statutes)
- State v. Kilgore, 295 Or App 602 (interpretation of ORS 137.542(2) limiting special probation conditions for medical‑marijuana cardholders)
- State v. Bowden, 292 Or App 815 (distinguished; concerned special probation conditions)