Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.409 (2026)

Revocation for conviction of crime

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      809.409 Revocation for conviction of crime. (1)(a) Upon receipt of a record of conviction of an offense described in this section, the Department of Transportation shall revoke the driving privileges of the person convicted.

      (b) A person is entitled to administrative review under ORS 809.440 of a revocation under this section.

      (c) Except as otherwise provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, the revocation shall be for a period of one year from the date of revocation, except that the department may not reinstate driving privileges of any person whose privileges are revoked under this section until the person complies with future responsibility filings.

      (2) The department shall take action under subsection (1) of this section upon receipt of a record of conviction of aggravated vehicular homicide or aggravated driving while suspended or revoked or any degree of murder, manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle or assault in the first degree resulting from the operation of a motor vehicle, except that the provisions of this subsection do not apply to a person whose driving privileges are ordered revoked under ORS 809.235. A person whose driving privileges are revoked under this subsection may apply for reinstatement of driving privileges:

      (a) If the sentence for the crime for which the person’s driving privileges were revoked, or any other crimes arising from the same criminal episode, includes incarceration, no sooner than 10 years from the date the person is released from incarceration for all crimes arising out of the same criminal episode; or

      (b) If the sentence for the crime for which the person’s driving privileges were revoked and any other crimes arising from the same criminal episode does not include incarceration, no sooner than 10 years from the date the department revoked the privileges under this subsection.

      (3)(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this subsection, the department shall take action under subsection (1) of this section upon receipt of a record of conviction of failure to perform the duties of a driver to injured persons under ORS 811.705.

      (b) The department shall revoke driving privileges under this subsection for a period of three years if the court indicates on the record of conviction that a person sustained serious physical injury, as defined in ORS 161.015, as a result of the accident. The person may apply for reinstatement of privileges three years after the date the person was released from incarceration, if the sentence includes incarceration. If the sentence does not include incarceration, the person may apply for reinstatement three years from the date the revocation was imposed under this subsection.

      (c) The department shall revoke driving privileges under this subsection for a period of five years if the court indicates on the record of conviction that a person was killed as a result of the accident. The person may apply for reinstatement of privileges five years after the date the person was released from incarceration, if the sentence includes incarceration. If the sentence does not include incarceration, the person may apply for reinstatement five years from the date the revocation was imposed under this subsection.

      (4) The department shall take action under subsection (1) of this section upon receipt of a record of conviction of any felony with a material element involving the operation of a motor vehicle.

      (5) As used in this section, “incarceration” means confinement in a Department of Corrections institution, as defined in ORS 421.005. [2003 c.402 §2; 2007 c.867 §10; 2009 c.320 §2; 2009 c.783 §10; 2011 c.355 §14; 2013 c.124 §1; 2018 c.76 §31; 2023 c.176 §1]

 

      809.410 [1983 c.338 §353; 1985 c.16 §166; 1985 c.301 §1; 1985 c.393 §10a; 1985 c.396 §6; 1985 c.669 §2a; 1985 c.714 §6; 1987 c.137 §4; 1987 c.258 §9; 1987 c.262 §4; 1989 c.224 §140; 1989 c.636 §31; 1989 c.715 §6; 1991 c.702 §10; 1993 c.393 §7; 1993 c.400 §2; 1993 c.627 §3; 1993 c.761 §4; 1995 c.79 §370; 1995 c.253 §5; 1995 c.656 §6; 1995 c.661 §1; 1997 c.83 §3; 1999 c.789 §6; 1999 c.796 §1; 1999 c.1077 §9; 2001 c.176 §5; 2001 c.294 §5; 2001 c.492 §9; 2003 c.14 §488; 2003 c.115 §1; repealed by 2003 c.402 §§6a,43]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2007–2025 · leading case: State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024).
State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 35× “2 Following the pertinent events in this case, ORS 809.409 was amended in ways that are immaterial to our analysis.”
State v. Farnham, 341 Or. App. 787 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 13× “411(5), rather than revoking for one year under ORS 809.409(4). Because we conclude that ORS 809.”
State v. Schriner, 336 Or. App. 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 35× “2 Following the pertinent events in this case, ORS 809.409 was amended in ways that are immaterial to our analysis.”
State v. Vazquez-Escobar, 153 P.3d 168 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “010 or its statutory counterpart in any other jurisdiction for a third or subsequent time.”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 6× “240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.409); ORS 809.409(4) (address- ing revocation for a conviction of any felony “with a mate- rial element involving the…”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 6× “240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.409); ORS 809.409(4) (address- ing revocation for a conviction of any felony “with a mate- rial element involving the…”
State v. Farnharm, 374 Or. 593 (Or. 2025). · cites it 2× “411(5) (providing for a 90-day driver’s license sus- pension for a first conviction) applies only to misdemeanor convictions for fleeing or attempting to elude, whereas ORS 809.409(4) (providing for a one-year driver’s license revoca- tion) applies to felony convictions for that…”
State v. Higgins, 332 Or. App. 769 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 5× “At the same hearing, defendant argued that ORS 809.409 did not apply to the crime of UUV because the term “vehicle” in ORS 164.”
State v. Roberts, 172 P.3d 651 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “240(1) requires the court to impose a suspension of driving privileges “for the required period” when “a person is convicted of an offense that will result in mandatory suspension or revocation under ORS 809.409, 809.411, 809.413, 813.400 or 814.”
State v. Farnham, 374 Or. 593 (Or. 2025). · cites it 2× “411(5) (providing for a 90-day driver’s license sus- pension for a first conviction) applies only to misdemeanor convictions for fleeing or attempting to elude, whereas ORS 809.409(4) (providing for a one-year driver’s license revoca- tion) applies to felony convictions for that…”
State v. Farnham, 374 Or. 593 (Or. 2025). · cites it 2× “411(5) (providing for a 90-day driver’s license sus- pension for a first conviction) applies only to misdemeanor convictions for fleeing or attempting to elude, whereas ORS 809.409(4) (providing for a one-year driver’s license revoca- tion) applies to felony convictions for that…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.409(1) — 2 cases
State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “2 Following the pertinent events in this case, ORS 809.409 was amended in ways that are immaterial to our analysis.”
State v. Schriner, 336 Or. App. 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “2 Following the pertinent events in this case, ORS 809.409 was amended in ways that are immaterial to our analysis.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.409(1)(a) — 1 case
State v. Higgins, 332 Or. App. 769 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “At the same hearing, defendant argued that ORS 809.409 did not apply to the crime of UUV because the term “vehicle” in ORS 164.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.409(1)(c) — 1 case
State v. Higgins, 332 Or. App. 769 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “At the same hearing, defendant argued that ORS 809.409 did not apply to the crime of UUV because the term “vehicle” in ORS 164.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.409(4) — 9 cases
State v. Farnham, 341 Or. App. 787 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “411(5), rather than revoking for one year under ORS 809.409(4). Because we conclude that ORS 809.”
State v. Schriner, 562 P.3d 296 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “2 Following the pertinent events in this case, ORS 809.409 was amended in ways that are immaterial to our analysis.”
State v. Schriner, 336 Or. App. 873 (Or. Ct. App. 2024). “2 Following the pertinent events in this case, ORS 809.409 was amended in ways that are immaterial to our analysis.”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.409); ORS 809.409(4) (address- ing revocation for a conviction of any felony “with a mate- rial element involving the…”
State v. Thomas, 341 Or. App. 286 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). “240(1)(a) (providing that a trial court shall revoke driving privileges upon conviction of an offense that results in mandatory revocation under ORS 809.409); ORS 809.409(4) (address- ing revocation for a conviction of any felony “with a mate- rial element involving the…”
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.