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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 811.130 (2026)

Impeding traffic; penalty

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

      811.130 Impeding traffic; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense of impeding traffic if the person drives a motor vehicle or a combination of motor vehicles in a manner that impedes or blocks the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

      (2) A person is not in violation of the offense described under this section if the person is proceeding in a manner needed for safe operation.

      (3) Proceeding in a manner needed for safe operation includes but is not necessarily limited to:

      (a) Momentarily stopping to allow oncoming traffic to pass before making a right-hand or left-hand turn.

      (b) Momentarily stopping in preparation of, or moving at an extremely slow pace while, negotiating an exit from the road.

      (4) A person is not in violation of the offense described under this section if the person is proceeding as part of a funeral procession under the direction of a funeral escort vehicle or a funeral lead vehicle.

      (5) The offense described in this section, impeding traffic, is a Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §569; 1985 c.16 §288; 1989 c.433 §1; 1991 c.482 §18; 1995 c.383 §45]

CARELESS AND RECKLESS DRIVING

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1991–2022 · leading case: State v. Tiffin, 121 P.3d 9 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Tiffin, 121 P.3d 9 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 10× “The trial court denied the motion after concluding that the officers had probable cause to believe that, by driving 10 to 12 miles per hour under the posted speed limit and *202 failing to allow the officers’ vehicle to pass, defendant had been impeding traffic in violation of…”
State v. Chen, 338 P.3d 795 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 18× “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for impeding traffic, ORS 811.130, 1 a Class D traffic violation.”
State v. Carson, 404 P.3d 1017 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 17× “See ORS 811.130. 1 Louka asked defendant why he was stopped in the middle of the road.”
State v. Pichardo, 388 P.3d 320 (Or. 2017). “At the hearing on that motion, Long testified that he stopped defendant for impeding traffic in violation of ORS 811.130. Later, he added that he “was concerned that [defendant] was assisting the other person to get out of the area with officers chasing him.”
State v. Boatright, 193 P.3d 78 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “ORS 811.130. 2 During the stop, Sweeney obtained the evidence that led to defendant’s arrest and conviction for DUII.”
State v. Pichardo, 326 P.3d 624 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “Long believed that defendant was impeding traffic in violation of *3 ORS 811.130. 3 As Long watched defendant’s car, a man who matched Hamilton’s description ran to the car, opened the front passenger door, jumped in, and leaned the seat back.”
State v. Harrop, 439 P.3d 548 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 8× “It contends that the trial court erred in concluding that the arresting police officer lacked probable cause to believe that defendant had impeded traffic in violation of ORS 811.130 when the officer stopped defendant.”
State v. Potter, 57 P.3d 944 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 12× “See ORS 811.130; ORS 801.360. Regarding the charge that he failed to use the bicycle lane, defendant argued that ORS 814.”
State v. Ordner, 287 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “We said: “Here, the state’s argument to the trial court focused exclusively on ORS 811.130 [impeding traffic], and defendant had no occasion to develop a record about whether the officers suspected that he had been driving under the influence of intoxicants and whether any such…”
State v. Nelson, 817 P.2d 1344 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). “The trial court appeared to be concerned whether defendant’s driving at a slow pace violated the traffic code, see ORS 811.130, as a matter of law. Whether any of defendant’s observed behavior violated a statute is not material; what is material is whether the actions could…”
State v. Jacoby, 508 P.3d 69 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 16× “On appeal, defendant assigns error to the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress, arguing that the underlying traffic stop for “impeding traffic” under ORS 811.130 was not supported by probable cause.”
State v. Murphy, 359 P.3d 507 (Or. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “After about a mile, the officers stopped the defendant for violation of ORS 811.130, which prohibits driving a motor vehicle “in a manner that impedes or blocks the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 811.130(1) — 7 cases
State v. Tiffin, 121 P.3d 9 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “The trial court denied the motion after concluding that the officers had probable cause to believe that, by driving 10 to 12 miles per hour under the posted speed limit and *202 failing to allow the officers’ vehicle to pass, defendant had been impeding traffic in violation of…”
State v. Chen, 338 P.3d 795 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for impeding traffic, ORS 811.130, 1 a Class D traffic violation.”
State v. Pichardo, 326 P.3d 624 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Long believed that defendant was impeding traffic in violation of *3 ORS 811.130. 3 As Long watched defendant’s car, a man who matched Hamilton’s description ran to the car, opened the front passenger door, jumped in, and leaned the seat back.”
State v. Potter, 57 P.3d 944 (Or. Ct. App. 2002). “See ORS 811.130; ORS 801.360. Regarding the charge that he failed to use the bicycle lane, defendant argued that ORS 814.”
State v. Pichardo, 362 P.3d 1 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 811.130(2) — 3 cases
State v. Chen, 338 P.3d 795 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for impeding traffic, ORS 811.130, 1 a Class D traffic violation.”
State v. Carson, 404 P.3d 1017 (Or. Ct. App. 2017). “See ORS 811.130. 1 Louka asked defendant why he was stopped in the middle of the road.”
State v. Jacoby, 508 P.3d 69 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “On appeal, defendant assigns error to the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress, arguing that the underlying traffic stop for “impeding traffic” under ORS 811.130 was not supported by probable cause.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 811.130(3)(a) — 1 case
State v. Chen, 338 P.3d 795 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for impeding traffic, ORS 811.130, 1 a Class D traffic violation.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 811.130(3)(b) — 2 cases
State v. Chen, 338 P.3d 795 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for impeding traffic, ORS 811.130, 1 a Class D traffic violation.”
State v. Jacoby, 508 P.3d 69 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “On appeal, defendant assigns error to the trial court’s denial of her motion to suppress, arguing that the underlying traffic stop for “impeding traffic” under ORS 811.130 was not supported by probable cause.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 811.130(4) — 1 case
State v. Chen, 338 P.3d 795 (Or. Ct. App. 2014). “Defendant appeals a judgment of conviction for impeding traffic, ORS 811.130, 1 a Class D traffic violation.”
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.