803.550
Illegal alteration or display of plates; exception; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense
of illegal alteration or illegal display of a registration plate if the person
knowingly does any of the following:
(a) Illegally
alters a registration plate in a manner described in subsection (2) of this
section.
(b) Causes a
registration plate to be illegally displayed as described in subsection (3) of
this section.
(c) Operates any
vehicle that is displaying a registration plate that is illegally altered in a
manner described in subsection (2) of this section or that is illegally
displayed as described in subsection (3) of this section.
(d) Owns and
causes or permits a vehicle to display a registration plate that is illegally
altered in a manner described in subsection (2) of this section or that is
illegally displayed as described in subsection (3) of this section.
(2) A
registration plate is illegally altered for purposes of this section if the
plate has been altered, modified, covered or obscured in any manner including,
but not limited to, the following:
(a) Any change of
the color, configuration, numbers, letters or material of the plate.
(b) Any material
or covering, other than a frame or plate holder, placed on, over or in front of
the plate that alters the appearance of the plate.
(c) Any frame or
plate holder that obscures the numbers, letters or registration stickers, so as
to render them unreadable.
(3) A
registration plate is illegally displayed for purposes of this section if the
plate:
(a) Is displayed
on a vehicle other than the vehicle for which the plate was issued; or
(b) Displays
registration stickers that contain an expiration date that is different from
the expiration date shown upon the vehicle registration records of the
Department of Transportation.
(4) Subsection
(2) of this section does not apply to the following:
(a) Any placement
of registration stickers described under ORS 803.555.
(b) Any public
official who displays or performs any alteration of a registration plate in the
course of official duties.
(c) Any special
interest registration plate approved under ORS 805.210.
(5) Subsection
(3)(a) of this section does not apply to a vehicle dealer authorized to use and
operate vehicles displaying the dealer’s plates under ORS 822.040.
(6) A person does
not commit the offense of illegal alteration or illegal display of a
registration plate if, at the time the conduct described in subsection (3)(b)
of this section occurs, the person has proof of registration of the vehicle but
has not yet received new registration stickers from the department. The proof
of vehicle registration is valid 30 days from the date of issuance. The
department shall adopt rules regarding what constitutes proof of vehicle
registration under this subsection.
(7) The court
shall dismiss any charge under this section if, prior to the court appearance
date listed on the citation, the person charged delivers to the clerk of the
court named on the citation proof of registration of the vehicle at the time of
the violation.
(8) The offense
described in this section, illegal alteration or illegal display of a
registration plate, is a Class B traffic violation. [1985 c.243 §2; 2007 c.192 §1;
2015 c.154 §1]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
19
cases (
7 in the last 5 years), 1992–2025 · leading case:
State v. Stearns, 101 P.3d 811 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
State v. Stearns, 101 P.3d 811 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 29× “Specifically, defendant contends that the arresting officer lacked objective probable cause to stop the vehicle in which defendant was a passenger because ORS 803.550, which prohibits “illegal alteration” of registration plates, 1 is not violated when a plate holder or frame…”
State v. Boatright, 193 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 17× “We conclude that the officer had probable cause to stop defendant for a violation of ORS 803.550 (2005), 1 illegal alteration or display of a registration plate, and therefore affirm the conviction.”
State v. Cowan, 542 P.3d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 25× “He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, maintaining in a single assignment of error that the police did not have probable cause for the stop.”
State v. Davis, 239 P.3d 1002 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “ORS 803.550 prohibits obscuring registration plates.”
State v. Tiffin, 121 P.3d 9 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“*204 Stearns, 196 Or App 272, 275 , 101 P3d 811 (2004) (“subjective belief that a traffic infraction occurred was objectively reasonable only if, in fact, obstruction of the word ‘Oregon’ by a registration plate frame is a violation of ORS 803.550”). As we explained in Hayes,…”
State v. Peirce, 440 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“3d 535 (2000) (driver of a stolen vehicle "at least had reason to believe" that the vehicle was stolen, in part, because the interior had been stripped and the vehicle had out-of-state license plates); ORS 803.550(3)(a) (a "registration plate is illegally displayed" if the plate…”
State v. Ankeny, 474 P.3d 406 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 2× “See Boatright, 222 Or App at 413-14 (officer had probable cause to investigate the defendant for illegal alteration or display of a registration plate, ORS 803.550, because, although the officer could see “the entire plate from an unusual position”—i.”
State v. Redmond, 834 P.2d 516 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“ORS 803.550(2). Green notified the dispatcher that he was about “to stop a possible motorcycle gang” and requested assistance.”
State v. Faubion, 308 P.3d 337 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“” Under ORS 803.550(2)(c), the offense of illegal alteration or display of a registration plate includes use of “[a]ny frame or plate holder that obscures the numbers, letters or registration stickers, so as to render them unreadable.”
State v. Lipka, 498 P.3d 811 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“Boatright, 222 Or App at 411-12 (whether the defendant knowingly violated ORS 803.550 was not material to determination of objective probable cause, even if state arguably would be required to prove knowledge to obtain a conviction); see also Gibson, 268 Or App at 437 (officer…”
Higgins v. DMV, 72 P.3d 628 (Or. 2003).
“" Once ODOT issues a registration plate, ORS 803.550 makes it an offense to alter or obscure a registration plate.”
State v. Mendell, 552 P.3d 750 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 26× “The sheriff’s deputy who made the stop believed that he had probable cause for a violation of ORS 803.550, which prohibits knowingly dis- playing an “altered, modified, covered or obscured” license plate.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(1) — 1 case
State v. Cowan, 542 P.3d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, maintaining in a single assignment of error that the police did not have probable cause for the stop.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(1)(a) — 1 case
State v. Cowan, 542 P.3d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, maintaining in a single assignment of error that the police did not have probable cause for the stop.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(1)(c) — 1 case
State v. Cowan, 542 P.3d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, maintaining in a single assignment of error that the police did not have probable cause for the stop.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(2) — 7 cases
State v. Boatright, 193 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“We conclude that the officer had probable cause to stop defendant for a violation of ORS 803.550 (2005), 1 illegal alteration or display of a registration plate, and therefore affirm the conviction.”
State v. Stearns, 101 P.3d 811 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
“Specifically, defendant contends that the arresting officer lacked objective probable cause to stop the vehicle in which defendant was a passenger because ORS 803.550, which prohibits “illegal alteration” of registration plates, 1 is not violated when a plate holder or frame…”
State v. Cowan, 542 P.3d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, maintaining in a single assignment of error that the police did not have probable cause for the stop.”
State v. Redmond, 834 P.2d 516 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“ORS 803.550(2). Green notified the dispatcher that he was about “to stop a possible motorcycle gang” and requested assistance.”
State v. Ankeny, 474 P.3d 406 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“See Boatright, 222 Or App at 413-14 (officer had probable cause to investigate the defendant for illegal alteration or display of a registration plate, ORS 803.550, because, although the officer could see “the entire plate from an unusual position”—i.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(2)(a) — 1 case
State v. Cowan, 542 P.3d 905 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“He challenges the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, maintaining in a single assignment of error that the police did not have probable cause for the stop.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(2)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Boatright, 193 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“We conclude that the officer had probable cause to stop defendant for a violation of ORS 803.550 (2005), 1 illegal alteration or display of a registration plate, and therefore affirm the conviction.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(2)(c) — 4 cases
State v. Stearns, 101 P.3d 811 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
“Specifically, defendant contends that the arresting officer lacked objective probable cause to stop the vehicle in which defendant was a passenger because ORS 803.550, which prohibits “illegal alteration” of registration plates, 1 is not violated when a plate holder or frame…”
State v. Boatright, 193 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“We conclude that the officer had probable cause to stop defendant for a violation of ORS 803.550 (2005), 1 illegal alteration or display of a registration plate, and therefore affirm the conviction.”
State v. Faubion, 308 P.3d 337 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“” Under ORS 803.550(2)(c), the offense of illegal alteration or display of a registration plate includes use of “[a]ny frame or plate holder that obscures the numbers, letters or registration stickers, so as to render them unreadable.”
State v. Mendell, 552 P.3d 750 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“The sheriff’s deputy who made the stop believed that he had probable cause for a violation of ORS 803.550, which prohibits knowingly dis- playing an “altered, modified, covered or obscured” license plate.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(3)(a) — 2 cases
State v. Peirce, 440 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“3d 535 (2000) (driver of a stolen vehicle "at least had reason to believe" that the vehicle was stolen, in part, because the interior had been stripped and the vehicle had out-of-state license plates); ORS 803.550(3)(a) (a "registration plate is illegally displayed" if the plate…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.550(8) — 1 case
State v. Mendell, 552 P.3d 750 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“The sheriff’s deputy who made the stop believed that he had probable cause for a violation of ORS 803.550, which prohibits knowingly dis- playing an “altered, modified, covered or obscured” license plate.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.