C. J. R. v. Fleming

The standard set by ORS 30.866(1) also applies to non-expressive contact. In order for a non-expressive contact to apply, the petitioner must prove that the communication instills in the addressee a fear of imminent and serious personal violence from the speaker, is unequivocal, and is objectively likely to be followed by unlawful acts.

Respondent appealed from a judgment granting Petitioner a permanent stalking protective order (SPO). Petitioner and Respondent had an intimate relationship from 2008 – 2010. At the time they met, Petition was already pregnant and Respondent agreed to be the legal father. The relationship ended in 2010 because Respondent became physically and emotionally abusive. In 2012, Petitioner filed for an SPO because Respondent began making her feel unsafe. The temporary SPO was granted. At trial for the permanent SPO, the trial court was persuaded that the Petitioner was afraid of Respondent and issued the permanent SPO. On appeal, Respondent argued the court erred in granting the permanent SPO. The Court held that there was enough evidence to prove two or more qualifying contacts under ORS 30.866(1), thus the trial court did not err. Affirmed.