803.560
Improper display; exception; penalty.
(1) A person commits the offense of improper display of validating stickers if
the person owns or drives a vehicle on which the display of registration
stickers provides proof of valid registration and:
(a) The stickers
are not displayed in a manner required by the Department of Transportation; or
(b) The stickers
are displayed on the vehicle after the registration period shown on the
stickers.
(2) A person does
not commit the offense of improper display of validating stickers if, at the
time the conduct described in subsection (1) 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.
(3) 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.
(4) The offense
described in this section, improper display of validating stickers, is a Class
D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §268; 1993 c.751 §27; 2015 c.154 §2]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 2003–2026 · leading case:
State v. Boatright, 193 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
State v. Boatright, 193 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“Because of our conclusion that Sweeney had probable cause to stop defendant for a violation of ORS 803.”
State v. Wood, 69 P.3d 1263 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
“210; ORS 803.560. Knapp pulled defendant over and parked behind his car.”
State v. Yocom, 555 P.3d 322 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 3× “093 (2021) precluded the deputy from issuing defendant a citation for violating ORS 803.560, the deputy’s belief that defendant had committed a traffic violation was objectively reasonable.”
Pinski (D. Or. 2026).
· cites it 7× “ORS 803.560 ORS 803.560 provides that a person “commits the offense of improper display of validating stickers if the person owns or drives a vehicle on which the display of registration stickers provides proof of valid registration and: (a) The stickers are not displayed in a…”
State v. Yocom (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 3× “093 (2021) precluded the deputy from issuing defendant a citation for violating ORS 803.560, the deputy’s belief that defendant had committed a traffic violation was objectively reasonable.”
State v. Gallagher, 320 Or. App. 629 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
““(j) Improper display of validating stickers under ORS 803.560. “(k) Failure of a person to hold a trip permit when required under ORS 803.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.560(1) — 1 case
Pinski (D. Or. 2026).
“ORS 803.560 ORS 803.560 provides that a person “commits the offense of improper display of validating stickers if the person owns or drives a vehicle on which the display of registration stickers provides proof of valid registration and: (a) The stickers are not displayed in a…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.560(1)(a) — 1 case
Pinski (D. Or. 2026).
“ORS 803.560 ORS 803.560 provides that a person “commits the offense of improper display of validating stickers if the person owns or drives a vehicle on which the display of registration stickers provides proof of valid registration and: (a) The stickers are not displayed in a…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.560(1)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Yocom, 555 P.3d 322 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“093 (2021) precluded the deputy from issuing defendant a citation for violating ORS 803.560, the deputy’s belief that defendant had committed a traffic violation was objectively reasonable.”
State v. Yocom (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“093 (2021) precluded the deputy from issuing defendant a citation for violating ORS 803.560, the deputy’s belief that defendant had committed a traffic violation was objectively reasonable.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 803.560(4) — 2 cases
State v. Yocom, 555 P.3d 322 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“093 (2021) precluded the deputy from issuing defendant a citation for violating ORS 803.560, the deputy’s belief that defendant had committed a traffic violation was objectively reasonable.”
State v. Yocom (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
“093 (2021) precluded the deputy from issuing defendant a citation for violating ORS 803.560, the deputy’s belief that defendant had committed a traffic violation was objectively reasonable.”
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.