Oregon Revised Statutes
Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.240 (2026)
Court-ordered suspension or revocation; taking possession of license or permit; temporary permit
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
ORSoregonlegislature.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
809.240 Court-ordered suspension or revocation; taking possession of license or permit; temporary permit. (1) If a person is convicted of an offense that will result in mandatory suspension or revocation under ORS 809.409, 809.411, 809.510 to 809.545 or 813.400 or any other law requiring suspension or revocation of driving privileges upon conviction of an offense, the trial judge shall:
(a) Order the revocation or suspension at the time of conviction for the required period; and
(b) Comply with the requirements under ORS 809.275 to take possession of the license or driver permit of the person.
(2) When necessary to give full effect to this section, a court shall issue a temporary driver permit under ORS 807.320. [1983 c.338 §395; 1985 c.16 §210; 1991 c.185 §5; 2003 c.402 §23; 2011 c.355 §29; 2013 c.237 §15]
809.250 [1983 c.338 §396; 1985 c.669 §14; 1987 c.730 §14; 1993 c.751 §55; renumbered 809.275 in 2005]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “It argues that both ORS 809.240 and ORS 809.409(4) permit the court to con- sider the factual circumstances of the conviction in making its determination.”
State v. Pohle, 505 P.3d 475 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “411(9) (requiring Department of Transportation to suspend driving privileges “upon receipt of a record of conviction of assault in the * * * third * * * degree resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle” and setting forth suspension period); ORS 809.240(1) (requir- ing…”
State v. Schriner, 336 Or. App. 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “It argues that both ORS 809.240 and ORS 809.409(4) permit the court to con- sider the factual circumstances of the conviction in making its determination.”
State v. Rodarte, 35 P.3d 1116 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “” ORS 809.240(l)(a). In many circumstances, the application of ORS 809.”
State v. Kauk, 714 P.2d 635 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “230); Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 395, as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 210 (now ORS 809.240); Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 393, as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 669, § 14 (now ORS 809.”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” See ORS 809.240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.”
State v. Roberts, 172 P.3d 651 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “As required under ORS 809.240(1), the court also suspended defendant’s driving privileges.”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” See ORS 809.240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.”
State v. Albert, 720 P.2d 1326 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “230); Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 395, as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 210 (now ORS 809.240); Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 393, as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 669, § 14 (now ORS 809.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.240(1) — 4 cases
State v. Pohle, 505 P.3d 475 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “411(9) (requiring Department of Transportation to suspend driving privileges “upon receipt of a record of conviction of assault in the * * * third * * * degree resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle” and setting forth suspension period); ORS 809.240(1) (requir- ing…”
State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “It argues that both ORS 809.240 and ORS 809.409(4) permit the court to con- sider the factual circumstances of the conviction in making its determination.”
State v. Schriner, 336 Or. App. 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “It argues that both ORS 809.240 and ORS 809.409(4) permit the court to con- sider the factual circumstances of the conviction in making its determination.”
State v. Roberts, 172 P.3d 651 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “As required under ORS 809.240(1), the court also suspended defendant’s driving privileges.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.240(1)(a) — 4 cases
State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “It argues that both ORS 809.240 and ORS 809.409(4) permit the court to con- sider the factual circumstances of the conviction in making its determination.”
State v. Schriner, 336 Or. App. 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “It argues that both ORS 809.240 and ORS 809.409(4) permit the court to con- sider the factual circumstances of the conviction in making its determination.”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” See ORS 809.240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “” See ORS 809.240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.240(l)(a) — 1 case
State v. Rodarte, 35 P.3d 1116 (Or. Ct. App. 2001). “” ORS 809.240(l)(a). In many circumstances, the application of ORS 809.”
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.