809.730
Seizure of motor vehicle for civil forfeiture; driving while under the
influence of intoxicants.
(1) A motor vehicle may be seized and forfeited if the person operating the
vehicle is arrested or issued a citation for driving while under the influence
of intoxicants in violation of ORS 813.010 and the person, within three years
prior to the arrest or issuance of the citation, has been convicted of:
(a) Driving while
under the influence of intoxicants in violation of:
(A) ORS 813.010;
or
(B) The statutory
counterpart to ORS 813.010 in another jurisdiction;
(b) A driving
under the influence of intoxicants offense in another jurisdiction that
involved the impaired driving of a vehicle due to the use of an intoxicant or a
combination of intoxicants;
(c) A driving
offense in another jurisdiction that involved operating a vehicle while having
a blood alcohol content above that jurisdiction’s permissible blood alcohol
content;
(d) Murder,
manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide or assault that resulted from the
operation of a motor vehicle in this state or in another jurisdiction; or
(e) Aggravated
vehicular homicide under ORS 163.149 or aggravated driving while suspended or
revoked under ORS 163.196.
(2) For the
purposes of subsection (1) of this section, a conviction for a driving offense
in another jurisdiction based solely on a person under 21 years of age having a
blood alcohol content that is lower than the permissible blood alcohol content
in that jurisdiction for a person 21 years of age or older does not constitute
a prior conviction.
(3) All seizure
and forfeiture proceedings under this section shall be conducted in accordance
with ORS chapter 131A. [1999 c.1100 §2; 2001 c.104 §304; 2001 c.780 §§18,18a;
2007 c.867 §12; 2007 c.879 §5; 2009 c.78 §61; 2009 c.783 §13; 2017 c.21 §79;
2021 c.253 §5; 2023 c.498 §10]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 2001–2021 · leading case:
State v. Guzman/Heckler, 455 P.3d 485 (Or. 2019).
State v. Guzman/Heckler, 455 P.3d 485 (Or. 2019).
“235(1)(b)(A)(ii) (permanent revocation of driver’s license); ORS 809.730 (1)(a)(B) (forfeiture of motor vehicle); ORS 813.”
State v. Ramirez, 493 P.3d 522 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “220 (disqualifying individuals from DUII diversion programs); ORS 809.730 (allowing for a motor vehicle to be seized); ORS 813.”
City of New Brighton v. 2000 Ford Excursion VIN 1FMNU43S2YEA74156, 622 N.W.2d 364 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001).
“] Or.Rev.Stat. § 809.730(l)(a) (1999). In North Dakota, a motor vehicle may be forfeited if a person drives under the influence of alcohol and has been convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol “within five years preceding the violation.”
Martini v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. (DMV), 373 P.3d 1227 (Multnomah Cty. Cir. Ct., O.R. 2016).
“235(l)(b) (2005), amended by Or Laws 2007, ch 879, § 4 (permanent revocation of driving privileges for third DUII conviction); ORS 809.730(l)(a) (2005), amended by. Or Laws 2007, ch 879, § 5 (providing for, seizure and forfeiture of vehicle for second DUII arrest or citation…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.730(1)(a) — 1 case
State v. Ramirez, 493 P.3d 522 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“220 (disqualifying individuals from DUII diversion programs); ORS 809.730 (allowing for a motor vehicle to be seized); ORS 813.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 809.730(l)(a) — 2 cases
City of New Brighton v. 2000 Ford Excursion VIN 1FMNU43S2YEA74156, 622 N.W.2d 364 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001).
“] Or.Rev.Stat. § 809.730(l)(a) (1999). In North Dakota, a motor vehicle may be forfeited if a person drives under the influence of alcohol and has been convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol “within five years preceding the violation.”
Martini v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. (DMV), 373 P.3d 1227 (Multnomah Cty. Cir. Ct., O.R. 2016).
“235(l)(b) (2005), amended by Or Laws 2007, ch 879, § 4 (permanent revocation of driving privileges for third DUII conviction); ORS 809.730(l)(a) (2005), amended by. Or Laws 2007, ch 879, § 5 (providing for, seizure and forfeiture of vehicle for second DUII arrest or citation…”
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.