If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. If something looks like a knife and cuts like a knife, does that make it a weapon? Even if it's a necessary utensil?
These were some of the questions the justices of the Oregon Supreme Court grappled with on April 17, 2025, while hearing the case of a probationer determined to have violated the terms of his parole. By having the handle of a steak knife protruding from his backpack while attending a probation meeting, Anthony Richard Cortes found himself facing sharp repercussions. With lower courts missing the point of his defense, Cortes took his case before the highest judiciary in the state.
Is That a Dagger I See Before Me?
After serving time for charges that included theft, burglary, escape, and criminal mischief, Cortes found himself on probation. While attending a meeting with his probation officer, Cortes arrived with the handle of a nine-inch-long steak knife protruding from his backpack. Determining that the knife's four-and-a-half-inch-long blade made it a weapon, the officer deemed Cortes in violation of his probation terms.
After losing in both trial court and on appeal, Cortes took his case to the Oregon Supreme Court. Through senior deputy public defender Frank Geiringer, Cortes implored the justices to require a legal differentiation between a tool, a utensil, and a weapon.
Oregon law forbids concealed carry of weapons such as switchblades, butterfly knives, and brass knuckles. Dirks and daggers are included on that list, but both are usually double-edged weapons with a blade length that ranges from six to twenty inches. Cortes' steak knife, with a blade length of four-and-a-half inches, would seem to fall short of that classification.
There is no statute for a maximum blade length permitted for those on probation. The assistant attorney general representing the state argued that case precedent has found probationers guilty of violating parole for blades of four-and-a-half inches. When questioned by one of the justices if that meant a probationer with a kitchen block containing a chef's knife, which are longer than steak knives, would be a violation, the state indicated that it would.
Because the handle of his steak knife was sticking out from his backpack, the state insisted that meant it could be interpreted as brandishing a weapon. If Cortes didn't have the handle showing, he still would have been in violation of Oregon law forbidding concealed carry of a dangerous weapon in a public building due to the higher standards for probationers.
When a justice asked if it would still considered a weapon if the handle of a hammer had been sticking out instead, the state made the arguable assertion that hammers lacked the history as a combat weapon that knives have.
The state indicated that a probationer who was a chef or learning to become one could apply for an exception. There's no record of Cortes doing so.
Weapon of Choice
In questioning what constituted a weapon, the justices noted that in a criminal case an object's status as a weapon was determined after it was used. Given this, they wondered how probationers could be warned about the danger associated with handling certain items. The state replied that they're cautioned not to use anything to threaten another person with. Geiringer argued that there wasn't enough evidence showing Cortes ever used the knife as a weapon despite the handle jutting from his backpack.
The justices seemed to have difficulty grasping when an item such as a baseball bat went from harmless to threatening and if it always carried the latter status. This, along with other questions raised during the hearing, will be addressed in their ruling at some unnamed point in the future.
Related Resources
- How To Get a Public Defender (FindLaw's Law and Daily Life)
- Probation (FindLaw's Criminal Procedure)
- Knife Laws (FindLaw's Product Liability Laws)
