Opinion ID: 836009
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Selness and Former Jeopardy under Article I, section 12

Text: In Selness, this court set out the following test for determining whether a proceeding, although nominally civil, amounts to jeopardy for purposes of Article I, section 12. First, we determine whether the legislature (or other governing body) intended the proceeding in question to be civil. If we conclude that the legislature did manifest such an intent, then we look for evidence that, despite the civil designation or intention, the proceeding is so far criminal in its nature that it is jeopardy within the meaning of Article I, section 12. The latter inquiry focuses on four factors or indicia: (1) the use of procedures that are strongly associated with the criminal law, such as indictment, arrest, and detention; (2) the potential for imposition of a penalty that is traditionally criminal or infamous, or that cannot be explained fully in terms of the penalty's supposed civil purpose; (3) the potential for a judgment or penalty that carries public stigma on the individual; and (4) the existence of collateral consequences that amount to criminal penalties, either by themselves or in combination with the direct consequences of the underlying acts. If we conclude, on the basis of our examination of those factors, that the proceeding is criminal in nature, then we will hold that the proceeding is jeopardy for purposes of Article I, section 12, and that further criminal prosecution of the matter is prohibited. See Selness, 334 Or at 536, 54 P.3d 1025 (setting out that test).