Computer Crime Defense in Corvallis

Respond Early to Digital Investigations & Criminal Charges

Computer crime investigations can move quickly from an investigator’s questions to subpoenas or requests to search electronic devices. Jennifer I. Nash & Nicolas Ortiz, P.C. represents people facing computer crime allegations in Corvallis and throughout Benton and Linn Counties. We provide guidance from the investigative stage through trial and, when necessary, an appeal.

Our criminal defense attorneys bring more than 40 years of combined experience to high-stakes cases, and we prepare every case for trial. Our past results include dismissals, lighter sentences, and favorable verdicts, although the outcome of any current case depends on its facts and evidence.

Don’t face questions from investigators alone. Call (541) 243-0678 to discuss an Oregon computer crime investigation or charge with our attorneys.

Oregon Computer Crime Charges Under ORS 164.377

Oregon law addresses several forms of computer crime. The prohibited conduct and charge classification depend on how a computer was allegedly used, whether access was authorized, and what the person allegedly intended to do.

The statute covers distinct types of alleged conduct:

• Fraud involving a computer: The law prohibits knowingly accessing, attempting to access, or using a computer, computer system, or computer network as part of a scheme to defraud, meaning a plan to obtain money, property, or services through false pretenses. A violation is a Class C felony.
• Damage or alteration: The law prohibits knowingly and without authorization altering, damaging, or destroying a computer, system, network, software, program, or data. A violation is a Class C felony.
• Unauthorized access or use: The law prohibits knowingly and without authorization using, accessing, or attempting to access a computer, system, network, software, documentation, or data. Unless another statutory provision applies, a violation is a Class A misdemeanor.

Theft under Oregon’s computer crime statute includes theft of proprietary information, which is nonpublic information controlled by its owner, and theft of an intimate image. These classifications identify the level of the charge, not the specific sentence that may apply in an individual case.

Responding to a Computer Crime Investigation in Corvallis

A person may first learn about an investigation through contact from law enforcement, a letter from a regulatory agency, or a subpoena for documents. An inquiry or subpoena doesn’t establish guilt, but the response can affect what information becomes available in a criminal case.

Computer crime allegations may draw on account records, communications, and device data. Early legal guidance is particularly important when officials seek to search a home, workplace, or electronic device.

We advise clients under investigation to take the following steps:

• Don’t speak with investigators without first consulting our attorneys.
• Limit conversations about the matter, including discussions by email, text message, or social media.
• Preserve documents, account records, communications, and other potentially relevant information.
• Contact our attorneys before responding to a subpoena or taking further action.

Our attorneys regularly appear in Benton County Circuit Court. That familiarity gives us practical context when advising clients in Corvallis-area criminal proceedings, while our trial preparation keeps the defense focused on the evidence and legal issues that may shape the case.

Authorization, Intent & Digital Evidence

A computer crime charge isn’t established merely because a computer or online platform was involved. Oregon courts examine authorization, intent, the purpose of the access, and the connection between the technology and the alleged offense.

Whether Access Was Authorized

Authorization can be central when a person had permission to use a device or system for limited purposes. Permission to access a system doesn’t necessarily authorize every use. In State v. Nascimento, the Oregon Supreme Court held that an employee authorized to access a lottery computer terminal for work didn’t act without authorization under ORS 164.377 merely because the conduct may have violated an employment policy.

The Connection to Alleged Criminal Conduct

In State v. Azar, decided in 2024, the Oregon Supreme Court held that using an online platform to sell stolen goods didn’t itself satisfy ORS 164.377(2)(c). The court required that the computer use be the direct, necessary means of carrying out the alleged criminal intent, not merely incidental to it. This decision provides legal context rather than a prediction about how another case may be decided.

Evidence Linking a Person to Digital Activity

Digital evidence may raise questions about who used an account or device, what that person intended, and whether the activity occurred with permission. Oregon courts have also held that copying computer passwords and password files can constitute theft of proprietary information. The significance of any account record, communication, or device data depends on the full circumstances.

Strategic Defense Through Trial & Appeal

We provide compassionate guidance and strategic representation to clients facing serious criminal allegations. Our goal is to protect your rights and future with a defense grounded in the statute, the available digital evidence, and the circumstances surrounding the alleged conduct. Our contact form provides a direct way to share the basic details of your situation.

If a conviction or unfavorable ruling has already occurred, our attorneys also have appellate experience. Appellate defense examines potential legal errors in the proceedings rather than retrying the case from the beginning.

Call (541) 243-0678 to speak with our attorneys about a computer crime charge or investigation.