809.720
Impoundment for specified offenses; grounds; notice; release. (1) A police officer who has
probable cause to believe that a person, at or just prior to the time the
police officer stops the person, has committed an offense described in this
subsection may, without prior notice, order the vehicle impounded until a person
with right to possession of the vehicle complies with the conditions for
release or the vehicle is ordered released by a hearings officer. This
subsection applies to the following offenses:
(a) Driving while
suspended or revoked in violation of ORS 811.175 or 811.182.
(b) Driving while
under the influence of intoxicants in violation of ORS 813.010.
(c) Operating
without driving privileges or in violation of license restrictions in violation
of ORS 807.010.
(d) Driving
uninsured in violation of ORS 806.010.
(2) Notice that
the vehicle has been impounded shall be given to the same parties, in the same
manner and within the same time limits as provided in ORS 819.180 for notice
after removal of a vehicle.
(3) A vehicle
impounded under subsection (1) of this section shall be released to a person
entitled to lawful possession upon compliance with the following:
(a) Submission of
proof that a person with valid driving privileges will be operating the
vehicle;
(b) Submission of
proof of compliance with financial responsibility requirements for the vehicle;
and
(c) Payment to
the police agency of an administrative fee determined by the agency to be
sufficient to recover its actual administrative costs for the impoundment.
(4)
Notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, a person who holds a security
interest in the impounded vehicle may obtain release of the vehicle by paying
the administrative fee.
(5) When a person
entitled to possession of the impounded vehicle has complied with the
requirements of subsection (3) or (4) of this section, the impounding police
agency shall authorize the person storing the vehicle to release it upon
payment of any towing and storage costs.
(6)
Notwithstanding subsection (3) of this section, the holder of a towing business
certificate issued under ORS 822.205 may foreclose a lien created by ORS 87.152
for the towing and storage charges incurred in the impoundment of the vehicle,
without payment of the administrative fee under subsection (3)(c) of this
section.
(7) Nothing in
this section or ORS 809.716 limits either the authority of a city or county to
adopt ordinances dealing with impounding of uninsured vehicles or the contents
of such ordinances except that cities and counties shall comply with the notice
requirements of subsection (2) of this section and ORS 809.725.
(8) A police
agency may not collect its fee under subsection (3)(c) of this section from a
holder of a towing business certificate issued under ORS 822.205 unless the
holder has first collected payment of any towing and storage charges associated
with the impoundment. [1997 c.514 §2; 2001 c.748 §1]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
20
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case:
State v. Dimmick, 273 P.3d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
State v. Dimmick, 273 P.3d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 4× “In support of that argument, the state relies on ORS 809.720(1), which provides: “A police officer who has probable cause to believe that a person, at or just prior to the time the police officer stops the person, has committed an offense described in this subsection may,…”
State v. Morgan, 203 P.3d 927 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 6× “The state counters that the officer was required by ORS 809.720 to impound and tow the car unless he could ascertain the ownership of the car and whether the putative driver was validly licensed.”
State v. Balabon, 426 P.3d 133 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
· cites it 11× “Defendant argues that the officers unlawfully impounded her vehicle under ORS 809.720, because they did not have probable cause to believe that she was driving without insurance and, therefore, the resulting inventory search was invalid.”
State v. Walker, 522 P.3d 868 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 4× “Dunlap gave defendant a copy of the completed “780 Form,” also known as a “Towed Auto Report,” as he normally does, which provided that the vehicle was being impounded under the authority of ORS 809.720 and outlined the process that defendant would need to go through to retrieve…”
Sergeant'S Towing, Inc. v. City of Portland, 22 P.3d 237 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “The legislature made a comparable change in state law in 1997 when it adopted ORS 809.720. The effect of the 1993 and 1997 amendments to PCC Chapter 16 is that PCC 16.”
State v. Gonzales, 236 P.3d 834 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 2× “ORS 809.720 and Cornelius City Code section 10.”
State v. Morgan, 230 P.3d 928 (Or. 2010).
“See ORS 809.720(3)(a) (permitting release of an impounded vehicle to person entitled to lawful possession, who submits proof of valid driving privileges).”
State v. Williams, 206 P.3d 269 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“It requires that police conduct an inventory whenever a vehicle is towed pursuant to ORS 809.720, which provides that police may impound a vehicle on probable cause to believe that the driver has committed certain offenses, including driving uninsured.”
State v. Bostwick, 202 P.3d 259 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “The pickup truck was impounded under the authority of ORS 809.720. 1 Defendant locked the vehicle and left the scene on foot, taking the keys *60 with him.”
State v. K. R. S., 464 P.3d 481 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“See ORS 809.720 (“A police officer who has probable cause to believe that a person * * * has com- mitted an offense described in this subsection may, without prior notice, order the vehicle impounded[.”
State v. Fulmer, 437 P.3d 257 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “As relevant here, ORS 809.720 authorizes impoundment of a person's vehicle if an officer has probable cause to believe that the person is driving with suspended driving privileges in violation of ORS 811.”
State v. Mastin, 124 P.3d 1275 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“1 ORS 809.720(l)(a) grants the police authority to impound a vehicle if an officer has probable cause to believe that the offense of driving while suspended has been committed in violation of ORS 811.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(1) — 3 cases
State v. Dimmick, 273 P.3d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
“In support of that argument, the state relies on ORS 809.720(1), which provides: “A police officer who has probable cause to believe that a person, at or just prior to the time the police officer stops the person, has committed an offense described in this subsection may,…”
State v. Balabon, 426 P.3d 133 (Or. Ct. App. 2018).
“Defendant argues that the officers unlawfully impounded her vehicle under ORS 809.720, because they did not have probable cause to believe that she was driving without insurance and, therefore, the resulting inventory search was invalid.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(1)(d) — 2 cases
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(2) — 2 cases
State v. Dimmick, 273 P.3d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
“In support of that argument, the state relies on ORS 809.720(1), which provides: “A police officer who has probable cause to believe that a person, at or just prior to the time the police officer stops the person, has committed an offense described in this subsection may,…”
State v. Walker, 522 P.3d 868 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
“Dunlap gave defendant a copy of the completed “780 Form,” also known as a “Towed Auto Report,” as he normally does, which provided that the vehicle was being impounded under the authority of ORS 809.720 and outlined the process that defendant would need to go through to retrieve…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(3) — 2 cases
State v. Morgan, 203 P.3d 927 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“The state counters that the officer was required by ORS 809.720 to impound and tow the car unless he could ascertain the ownership of the car and whether the putative driver was validly licensed.”
Sergeant'S Towing, Inc. v. City of Portland, 22 P.3d 237 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
“The legislature made a comparable change in state law in 1997 when it adopted ORS 809.720. The effect of the 1993 and 1997 amendments to PCC Chapter 16 is that PCC 16.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(3)(a) — 1 case
State v. Morgan, 230 P.3d 928 (Or. 2010).
“See ORS 809.720(3)(a) (permitting release of an impounded vehicle to person entitled to lawful possession, who submits proof of valid driving privileges).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(6) — 1 case
State v. Dimmick, 273 P.3d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
“In support of that argument, the state relies on ORS 809.720(1), which provides: “A police officer who has probable cause to believe that a person, at or just prior to the time the police officer stops the person, has committed an offense described in this subsection may,…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(l)(a) — 1 case
State v. Mastin, 124 P.3d 1275 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“1 ORS 809.720(l)(a) grants the police authority to impound a vehicle if an officer has probable cause to believe that the offense of driving while suspended has been committed in violation of ORS 811.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.720(l)(d) — 1 case
State v. Dimmick, 273 P.3d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
“In support of that argument, the state relies on ORS 809.720(1), which provides: “A police officer who has probable cause to believe that a person, at or just prior to the time the police officer stops the person, has committed an offense described in this subsection may,…”
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.