Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640 (2026)

Procedures on habitual offender determination

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

      809.640 Procedures on habitual offender determination. When the Department of Transportation determines from the driving record of a person as maintained by the department that a person’s driving privileges are required to be revoked as a habitual offender under ORS 809.600, the department shall revoke the driving privileges of the person. A person is entitled to administrative review of a revocation under this section. [1983 c.338 §367; 1985 c.16 §187; 1991 c.702 §12a]

 

      809.650 [1983 c.338 §366; 1985 c.16 §186; repealed by 2018 c.76 §1]

 

      809.660 [1985 c.16 §189; repealed by 2018 c.76 §1]

 

VEHICLE IMPOUNDMENT AND IMMOBILIZATION; SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1986–2008 · leading case: State v. Sims, 66 P.3d 472 (Or. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Sims, 66 P.3d 472 (Or. 2003). · cites it 3× “"* * * * * “(3) The crime is a Class C felony if the suspension or revocation resulted from any of the following: “(a) Habitual offender status under ORS 809.640.” 3 The text of ORS 811.182 (1997) does not require the state, in prosecuting a charge of felony DWR, to consider,…”
State v. Jones, 195 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “182 — the 1997 version of the provision criminalizing driving while suspended or revoked and making it a felony if the suspension or revocation “resulted from” the defendant’s “[hjabitual offender status under ORS 809.640” — did not permit a defendant to collaterally attack the…”
State v. Harris, 118 P.3d 236 (Or. 2005). “The administrative revocation proceedings that follow pursuant to ORS 809.640 are also juryless. If the administrative process results in a determination that the driver is indeed a habitual offender, that finding will raise any subsequent conviction for driving while suspended…”
State v. Atkinson, 751 P.2d 784 (Or. 1988). · cites it 2× “727 (now see ORS 809.640) provided, in part: "(1) When the division determines from the driving record of a person as maintained by the division that a person is a habitual offender as defined under ORS 484.”
State v. Vandepoll, 846 P.2d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 6× “It now provides: "When the division determines from the driving record of a person as maintained by the division that a person's driving privileges are required to be revoked as a habitual offender under ORS 809.600, the division shall revoke the driving privileges of the person.”
State v. Early, 43 P.3d 439 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “* ** * * “(3) The crime is a Class C felony if the suspension or revocation resulted from any of the following: “(a) Habitual offender status under ORS 809.640. “(b) Any degree of murder, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide or assault resulting from the operation of a…”
State v. Jones, 112 P.3d 356 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “182 (1997), which provided that the crime was a Class C felony if the underlying suspension or revocation “resulted from * * * [h]abitual offender status under ORS 809.640.” In the process of discerning the legislature’s intent regarding ORS 811.”
Moore v. Motor Vehs. Div., 818 P.2d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 13× “ORS 809.640; ORS 809.600(1). He challenges MVD’s use of a DUII conviction and a DWS conviction as underlying offenses in its determination.”
State v. Daniels, 886 P.2d 1019 (Or. 1994). “ijí # “(3) The crime is a Class C felony if the suspension or revocation resulted from any of the following: “(a) Habitual offender status under ORS 809.640. iCifr s»: % # jfr “(c) Any crime punishable as a felony with proof of a material element involving the operation of a…”
Franklin v. State, 819 P.2d 739 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “It also concedes that, but for that conviction, “MVD would not have revoked [his] driving privileges pursuant to ORS 809.640(1)(a).” It asserts, nevertheless, that petitioner is not entitled to have the felony convictions set aside.”
State v. Atkinson, 728 P.2d 564 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “727 was repealed by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 475, and replaced by Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 367, as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 187, (now ORS 809.640) effective January 1,1986. Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 981.”
Livengood v. Motor Vehs. Div., 728 P.2d 84 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “727 was repealed by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 475 and replaced by Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 367, as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 187 (now ORS 809.640). Petitioner had two convictions for driving while under the influence of intoxicants and one conviction for driving while…”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(1) — 2 cases
State v. Sims, 66 P.3d 472 (Or. 2003). “"* * * * * “(3) The crime is a Class C felony if the suspension or revocation resulted from any of the following: “(a) Habitual offender status under ORS 809.640.” 3 The text of ORS 811.182 (1997) does not require the state, in prosecuting a charge of felony DWR, to consider,…”
Moore v. Motor Vehs. Div., 818 P.2d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “ORS 809.640; ORS 809.600(1). He challenges MVD’s use of a DUII conviction and a DWS conviction as underlying offenses in its determination.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(1)(a) — 1 case
Franklin v. State, 819 P.2d 739 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “It also concedes that, but for that conviction, “MVD would not have revoked [his] driving privileges pursuant to ORS 809.640(1)(a).” It asserts, nevertheless, that petitioner is not entitled to have the felony convictions set aside.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(1)(b) — 1 case
State v. Vandepoll, 846 P.2d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “It now provides: "When the division determines from the driving record of a person as maintained by the division that a person's driving privileges are required to be revoked as a habitual offender under ORS 809.600, the division shall revoke the driving privileges of the person.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(2) — 1 case
Moore v. Motor Vehs. Div., 818 P.2d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “ORS 809.640; ORS 809.600(1). He challenges MVD’s use of a DUII conviction and a DWS conviction as underlying offenses in its determination.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(4) — 1 case
State v. Vandepoll, 846 P.2d 1174 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “It now provides: "When the division determines from the driving record of a person as maintained by the division that a person's driving privileges are required to be revoked as a habitual offender under ORS 809.600, the division shall revoke the driving privileges of the person.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(5) — 1 case
Moore v. Motor Vehs. Div., 818 P.2d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “ORS 809.640; ORS 809.600(1). He challenges MVD’s use of a DUII conviction and a DWS conviction as underlying offenses in its determination.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(6) — 1 case
Moore v. Motor Vehs. Div., 818 P.2d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “ORS 809.640; ORS 809.600(1). He challenges MVD’s use of a DUII conviction and a DWS conviction as underlying offenses in its determination.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.640(7)(a) — 1 case
Moore v. Motor Vehs. Div., 818 P.2d 974 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “ORS 809.640; ORS 809.600(1). He challenges MVD’s use of a DUII conviction and a DWS conviction as underlying offenses in its determination.”
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.