Signed by Governor Kate Brown

Vote Smart's Synopsis:

Vote to pass a bill that prohibits the use of the "gay panic" defense for a murder trial.

Highlights:

• Establishes it is an affirmative defense to murder in the second degree that the homicide was committed under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance if the disturbance is not the result of the person’s own intentional, knowing, reckless or criminally negligent act and if there is a reasonable explanation for the disturbance (Sec. 1-1).

• Prohibits the defendant from introducing in the defendant’s case in chief expert testimony regarding extreme emotional disturbance under this section unless the defendant gives notice of the defendant’s intent to do so (Sec. 1-2.a).

• Requires the notice to be in writing and must be filed at the time the defendant pleads not guilty. The defendant may file the notice at any time after the defendant pleads but before trial if the court determines that there was just cause for failure to file the notice at the time of the defendant’s plea (Sec. 1-2.b).

• Specifies if the defendant fails to file notice, the defendant cannot introduce evidence for the purpose of proving extreme emotional disturbance unless the court, in its discretion, determines that there was just cause for failure to file notice (Sec. 1-2.c).

• Authorizes the state to have at least one psychiatrist or licensed psychologist of its selection examine the defendant (Sec. 1-3).

• Specifies the discovery of, knowledge about or potential disclosure of the victim’s actual or perceived gender, gender identity, gender expression or sexual orientation, including but not limited to circumstances in which the victim made a romantic or sexual advance that was unwanted but did not involve force toward the defendant, does not constitute a reasonable explanation for an extreme emotional disturbance (Sec. 1-4).

• Prohibits using physical force upon another person if (Sec. 2-1):

• With intent to cause physical injury or death to another person, the person provokes the use of unlawful physical force by that person;

• The person is the initial aggressor, except that the use of physical force upon another person under such circumstances is justifiable if the person withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person the intent to do so, but the latter nevertheless continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful physical force;

• The physical force involved is the product of a combat by agreement not specifically authorized by law;

• The person would not have used physical force but for the discovery of the other person’s actual or perceived gender, gender identity, gender expression or sexual orientation.

Full Bill Text