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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.300 (2026)

Security for appearance on traffic crime

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

      810.300 Security for appearance on traffic crime. (1) A court, including a magistrate or clerk or deputy clerk authorized by the magistrate, shall release a person brought before it if the person gives an adequate undertaking to appear in answer to the offense at the time and place fixed by the court. A court, as it deems appropriate, is authorized to accept and may require any of the following as security for the appearance of an arrested person before the court on a traffic crime:

      (a) An automobile membership card as described under ORS 810.330 and subject to limitations under that section.

      (b) A guaranteed arrest bond certificate as described under ORS 810.320 and subject to limitations under that section.

      (c) A license as described under ORS 810.310 and subject to limitations under that section.

      (d) Such sum as may be required by the court.

      (2) A magistrate or clerk or deputy clerk authorized by the magistrate has authority to accept security for the appearance of a person arrested for a traffic crime and brought before the magistrate or clerk or deputy clerk, as provided in this section. The following apply to security that is accepted by a court under this section or that is forwarded to a court by a police office under ORS 810.448 or 810.450:

      (a) The security shall be returned to the person when the person delivers any security amount required by the court. The court may require that any moneys deposited as security be applied against the security amount set by the court.

      (b) If the magistrate does not have jurisdiction of the crime, the magistrate shall promptly forward the security accepted and all documents in connection with the case to the most conveniently located court having jurisdiction of the crime and in which the venue may properly be laid. [1983 c.338 §376; 1999 c.1051 §285]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2007–2007 · leading case: State v. Mersman, 172 P.3d 654 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Mersman, 172 P.3d 654 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “In Ortiz , the defendant’s Idaho conviction was based on a statute that had the same use, role, or characteristics as ORS 810.300(3), Oregon’s implied consent statute for persons under 21.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.300(3) — 1 case
State v. Mersman, 172 P.3d 654 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). “In Ortiz , the defendant’s Idaho conviction was based on a statute that had the same use, role, or characteristics as ORS 810.300(3), Oregon’s implied consent statute for persons under 21.”
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.