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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410 (2026)

Arrest and citation

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

      810.410 Arrest and citation. (1) A police officer may arrest or issue a citation to a person for a traffic crime at any place within or outside the jurisdictional authority of the governmental unit by which the police officer is authorized to act as provided by ORS 133.235 and 133.310.

      (2) A police officer may issue a citation to a person for a traffic violation at any place within or outside the jurisdictional authority of the governmental unit by which the police officer is authorized to act:

      (a) When the traffic violation is committed in the police officer’s presence; or

      (b) When the police officer has probable cause to believe an offense has occurred based on a description of the vehicle or other information received from a police officer who observed the traffic violation.

      (3) A police officer:

      (a) May not arrest a person for a traffic violation.

      (b) May stop and detain a person for a traffic violation for the purposes of investigation reasonably related to the traffic violation, identification and issuance of citation.

      (c) May make an inquiry into circumstances arising during the course of a detention and investigation under paragraph (b) of this subsection that give rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

      (d) May make an inquiry to ensure the safety of the officer, the person stopped or other persons present, including an inquiry regarding the presence of weapons.

      (e) May request consent to search in relation to the circumstances referred to in paragraph (c) of this subsection or to search for items of evidence otherwise subject to search or seizure under ORS 133.535, only if the officer first informs the person that the person has the right to refuse the request. If consent is obtained, the officer shall ensure that there is a written, video or audio record that the person gave informed and voluntary consent to search. This subsection does not apply to implied consent searches described in ORS 813.100, 813.131 or 813.135.

      (f) May use the degree of force reasonably necessary to make the stop and ensure the safety of the police officer, the person stopped or other persons present.

      (g) May make an arrest of a person as authorized by ORS 133.310 (2) if the person is stopped and detained pursuant to the authority of this section.

      (4) When a police officer at the scene of a traffic accident has reasonable grounds, based upon the police officer’s personal investigation, to believe that a person involved in the accident has committed a traffic offense in connection with the accident, the police officer may issue to the person a citation for that offense. The authority under this subsection is in addition to any other authority to issue a citation for a traffic offense. [1983 c.338 §400; 1985 c.16 §212; 1991 c.720 §1; 1995 c.308 §1; 1997 c.682 §1; 1997 c.866 §§4,5; 1999 c.1051 §89; 2011 c.506 §48; 2011 c.644 §33; 2022 c.78 §2]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 217 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: State v. Amaya, 89 P.3d 1163 (Or. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Amaya, 89 P.3d 1163 (Or. 2004). · cites it 26× “We begin with ORS 810.410, the statute that authorizes certain police conduct when a police officer makes a valid traffic stop.”
State v. Aguilar, 912 P.2d 379 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 45× “Dominguez-Martinez , the Supreme Court held that ORS 810.410 "defines the parameters of police authority to detain and investigate during a traffic stop.”
State v. Dominguez-Martinez, 895 P.2d 306 (Or. 1995). · cites it 32× “[5] It also is clear, however, that an officer who stops a person for a traffic infraction may investigate only that infraction, unless the state can point to some basis other than the traffic infraction to broaden the scope of the investigation.”
State v. Toevs, 964 P.2d 1007 (Or. 1998). · cites it 27× “Defendant first argues that the officers’ conduct constituted a continued detention that was not reasonably related to the traffic stop and, therefore, was unlawful under Dominguez-Martinez .”
State v. Thompkin, 143 P.3d 530 (Or. 2006). · cites it 22× “On appeal, defendant argued that Reagan's conduct was not authorized by ORS 810.410, [3] which governs officer conduct during a stop for a traffic violation.”
State v. Rodgers, 227 P.3d 695 (Or. 2010). · cites it 10× “The court concluded that the deputy's request to conduct a patdown had not violated ORS 810.410; however, the trial court further concluded that that request had violated Article I, section 9, because the patdown had gone beyond "ordinary social intercourse" and therefore had…”
State v. Hadley, 932 P.2d 1194 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 29× “[1] In so holding, the court stated variously: "It also is clear * * * that an officer who stops a person for a traffic infraction may investigate only that infraction, unless the state can point to some basis other than the traffic infraction to broaden the scope of the…”
State v. Meyer, 53 P.3d 940 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 25× “6 The trial court concluded that Johnson’s stop and citation of defendant was authorized under ORS 810.410(2), providing in part that a police officer “may issue a citation to *540 a person for a traffic violation at any place within or outside the jurisdictional authority of…”
State v. Porter, 817 P.2d 1306 (Or. 1991). · cites it 16× “5 We begin our analysis with the statute, ORS 810.410, which provides in part: “ (2) A police officer may issue a citation to a person for a traffic infraction * * * when the traffic infraction is committed in the police officer’s presence.”
State v. Arreola-Botello, 451 P.3d 939 (Or. 2019). · cites it 5× “For example, ORS 810.410 governs an officer’s ability to conduct an investigation during a traffic stop for a traffic violation, and, under that statute, officers are permitted to make additional, unrelated inquiries only in specific circumstances.”
State v. Watson, 305 P.3d 94 (Or. 2013). · cites it 8× “” ORS 810.410, 11 which establishes police authority to conduct traffic stops, make arrests, and issue citations, includes similar provisions.”
State v. Aguilar, 867 P.2d 520 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 38× “ORS 810.410 states the extent of, and limits on, Kelley's authority during the traffic stop.”
Show all 217 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(1) — 4 cases
State v. Holmes, 813 P.2d 28 (Or. 1991).
State v. Kurtz, 228 P.3d 583 (Or. Ct. App. 2010).
State v. Bea, 864 P.2d 854 (Or. 1993).
State v. Pamperien, 967 P.2d 503 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(2) — 18 cases
State v. Aguilar, 478 P.3d 558 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
State v. Arreola-Botello, 451 P.3d 939 (Or. 2019). “For example, ORS 810.410 governs an officer’s ability to conduct an investigation during a traffic stop for a traffic violation, and, under that statute, officers are permitted to make additional, unrelated inquiries only in specific circumstances.”
State v. Olaiz, 786 P.2d 734 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Holmes, 813 P.2d 28 (Or. 1991).
State v. Meyer, 53 P.3d 940 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “6 The trial court concluded that Johnson’s stop and citation of defendant was authorized under ORS 810.410(2), providing in part that a police officer “may issue a citation to *540 a person for a traffic violation at any place within or outside the jurisdictional authority of…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(2)(a) — 5 cases
State v. Meyer, 53 P.3d 940 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “6 The trial court concluded that Johnson’s stop and citation of defendant was authorized under ORS 810.410(2), providing in part that a police officer “may issue a citation to *540 a person for a traffic violation at any place within or outside the jurisdictional authority of…”
State v. Garcia, 377 P.3d 596 (Multnomah Cty. Cir. Ct., O.R. 2016).
State v. Frias, 210 P.3d 914 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
Alvarez v. Univ. of Oregon (D. Or. 2020).
State v. Saffran, 172 P.3d 283 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(2)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Suppah, 369 P.3d 1108 (Or. 2016).
State v. Suppah (Or. 2016).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3) — 63 cases
State v. Amaya, 89 P.3d 1163 (Or. 2004). “We begin with ORS 810.410, the statute that authorizes certain police conduct when a police officer makes a valid traffic stop.”
State v. Dominguez-Martinez, 895 P.2d 306 (Or. 1995). “[5] It also is clear, however, that an officer who stops a person for a traffic infraction may investigate only that infraction, unless the state can point to some basis other than the traffic infraction to broaden the scope of the investigation.”
State v. Aguilar, 912 P.2d 379 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “Dominguez-Martinez , the Supreme Court held that ORS 810.410 "defines the parameters of police authority to detain and investigate during a traffic stop.”
State v. Toevs, 964 P.2d 1007 (Or. 1998). “Defendant first argues that the officers’ conduct constituted a continued detention that was not reasonably related to the traffic stop and, therefore, was unlawful under Dominguez-Martinez .”
State v. Porter, 817 P.2d 1306 (Or. 1991). “5 We begin our analysis with the statute, ORS 810.410, which provides in part: “ (2) A police officer may issue a citation to a person for a traffic infraction * * * when the traffic infraction is committed in the police officer’s presence.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3)(a) — 8 cases
State v. Smith, 796 P.2d 665 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Washington, 335 P.3d 877 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Whitten, 379 P.3d 707 (Multnomah Cty. Cir. Ct., O.R. 2016).
State v. Warner, 153 P.3d 674 (Or. 2007).
State v. Uroza-Zuniga, 402 P.3d 772 (Or. Ct. App. 2017).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3)(b) — 101 cases
State v. Toevs, 964 P.2d 1007 (Or. 1998). “Defendant first argues that the officers’ conduct constituted a continued detention that was not reasonably related to the traffic stop and, therefore, was unlawful under Dominguez-Martinez .”
State v. Dominguez-Martinez, 895 P.2d 306 (Or. 1995). “[5] It also is clear, however, that an officer who stops a person for a traffic infraction may investigate only that infraction, unless the state can point to some basis other than the traffic infraction to broaden the scope of the investigation.”
State v. Hadley, 932 P.2d 1194 (Or. Ct. App. 1997). “[1] In so holding, the court stated variously: "It also is clear * * * that an officer who stops a person for a traffic infraction may investigate only that infraction, unless the state can point to some basis other than the traffic infraction to broaden the scope of the…”
State v. Cruz-Aguirre, 972 P.2d 1206 (Or. Ct. App. 1999).
State v. Aguilar, 912 P.2d 379 (Or. Ct. App. 1996). “Dominguez-Martinez , the Supreme Court held that ORS 810.410 "defines the parameters of police authority to detain and investigate during a traffic stop.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3)(c) — 11 cases
State v. Thompkin, 143 P.3d 530 (Or. 2006). “On appeal, defendant argued that Reagan's conduct was not authorized by ORS 810.410, [3] which governs officer conduct during a stop for a traffic violation.”
State v. Amaya, 89 P.3d 1163 (Or. 2004). “We begin with ORS 810.410, the statute that authorizes certain police conduct when a police officer makes a valid traffic stop.”
State v. Arreola-Botello, 451 P.3d 939 (Or. 2019). “For example, ORS 810.410 governs an officer’s ability to conduct an investigation during a traffic stop for a traffic violation, and, under that statute, officers are permitted to make additional, unrelated inquiries only in specific circumstances.”
State v. Toevs, 964 P.2d 1007 (Or. 1998). “Defendant first argues that the officers’ conduct constituted a continued detention that was not reasonably related to the traffic stop and, therefore, was unlawful under Dominguez-Martinez .”
State v. Watson, 305 P.3d 94 (Or. 2013). “” ORS 810.410, 11 which establishes police authority to conduct traffic stops, make arrests, and issue citations, includes similar provisions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3)(d) — 17 cases
State v. Amaya, 89 P.3d 1163 (Or. 2004). “We begin with ORS 810.410, the statute that authorizes certain police conduct when a police officer makes a valid traffic stop.”
State v. Jimenez, 353 P.3d 1227 (Or. 2015).
State v. Kirkeby, 185 P.3d 510 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
State v. Amaya, 29 P.3d 1177 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
State v. Rodgers, 227 P.3d 695 (Or. 2010). “The court concluded that the deputy's request to conduct a patdown had not violated ORS 810.410; however, the trial court further concluded that that request had violated Article I, section 9, because the patdown had gone beyond "ordinary social intercourse" and therefore had…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3)(e) — 10 cases
State v. Arreola-Botello, 451 P.3d 939 (Or. 2019). “For example, ORS 810.410 governs an officer’s ability to conduct an investigation during a traffic stop for a traffic violation, and, under that statute, officers are permitted to make additional, unrelated inquiries only in specific circumstances.”
State v. Kirkeby, 185 P.3d 510 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
State v. Wood, 69 P.3d 1263 (Or. Ct. App. 2003).
State v. Raney, 168 P.3d 803 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Duffy, 29 P.3d 1222 (Or. Ct. App. 2001).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3)(f) — 4 cases
State v. Watson, 305 P.3d 94 (Or. 2013). “” ORS 810.410, 11 which establishes police authority to conduct traffic stops, make arrests, and issue citations, includes similar provisions.”
State v. Warner, 153 P.3d 674 (Or. 2007).
State v. Young, 343 P.3d 277 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Jenson, 184 P.3d 1194 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3)(g) — 3 cases
State v. Toevs, 964 P.2d 1007 (Or. 1998). “Defendant first argues that the officers’ conduct constituted a continued detention that was not reasonably related to the traffic stop and, therefore, was unlawful under Dominguez-Martinez .”
State v. Civil, 539 P.3d 317 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
State v. Civil (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(3Xb) — 1 case
State v. Toevs, 964 P.2d 1007 (Or. 1998). “Defendant first argues that the officers’ conduct constituted a continued detention that was not reasonably related to the traffic stop and, therefore, was unlawful under Dominguez-Martinez .”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(4) — 1 case
State v. Anfield, 836 P.2d 1337 (Or. 1992).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 810.410(b) — 1 case
State v. Mesa, 822 P.2d 143 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
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.