Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.120 (2026)

Police report to department

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

      813.120 Police report to department. (1) A report required by ORS 813.100 shall disclose substantially all of the following information:

      (a) Whether the person, at the time the person was requested to submit to a test, was under arrest for driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of intoxicants in violation of ORS 813.010 or of a municipal ordinance.

      (b) Whether the police officer had reasonable grounds to believe, at the time the request was made, that the person arrested had been driving under the influence of intoxicants in violation of ORS 813.010 or of a municipal ordinance.

      (c) Whether the person refused to submit to a test or if the person submitted to a breath or blood test whether the level of alcohol in the person’s blood, as shown by the test, was sufficient to constitute being under the influence of intoxicating liquor under ORS 813.300.

      (d) Whether the person was driving a commercial motor vehicle and refused to submit to a test or if the person submitted to a breath or blood test whether the level of alcohol in the person’s blood, as shown by the test, was 0.04 percent or more by weight.

      (e) Whether the person was informed of consequences and rights as described under ORS 813.130.

      (f) Whether the person was given written notice of intent to suspend required by ORS 813.100 (2)(b).

      (g) If the arrested person took a test, a statement that the person conducting the test was appropriately qualified.

      (h) If the arrested person took a test, a statement that any methods, procedures and equipment used in the test comply with any requirements under ORS 813.160.

      (2) A report required by ORS 813.100 may be made in one or more forms specified by the Department of Transportation. [1983 c.338 §405; 1985 c.16 §215; 1985 c.672 §20; 1989 c.636 §42; 1993 c.305 §3; 1993 c.751 §70; 1995 c.568 §3; 2019 c.475 §12]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1990–2022 · leading case: Owens v. Motor Vehs. Div., 875 P.2d 463 (Or. 1994).
Owens v. Motor Vehs. Div., 875 P.2d 463 (Or. 1994). · cites it 5× ““(d) If the report under ORS 813.120 indicates that the person was driving a commercial motor vehicle, the vehicle was in fact a commercial motor vehicle as defined in ORS 801.”
Supension of Driving Privileges of Cole v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch, 87 P.3d 1120 (Or. 2004). · cites it 4× “16 Under the Implied Consent Law, if DMV receives a police report indicating that a driver has been arrested for driving under the influence, ORS 813.120, then DMV is required to suspend the individual’s driver license.”
Coulter v. Oregon Dep't of Transp., Driver & Motor Veh. Servs., 4 P.3d 89 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 39× “410(1), the report failed to comply substantially with ORS 813.120. Petitioner argued that, according to Dotson, a reasonable objective of ORS 813.”
State v. MacHuca, 218 P.3d 145 (Or. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “"(d) Within a period of time required by the department by rule, report action taken under this section to the department and prepare and cause to be delivered to the department a report as described in ORS 813.120, along with the confiscated license or permit and a copy of the…”
State v. Rafeh, 393 P.3d 1155 (Or. 2017). · cites it 3× “100(3) directs the officer to take immediate custody of the person’s driver’s license, “provide the person with a written notice of intent to suspend, on forms prepared and provided by the Department of Transportation,” and report to the department certain information set out in…”
Gildroy v. Motor Vehs. Div., 848 P.2d 96 (Or. 1993). “3 It was during this mandatory delay before testing that petitioner telephoned his lawyer.”
State v. Goss, 984 P.2d 938 (Or. Ct. App. 1999). “See ORS 813.120. He advised defendant of the consequences of taking or refusing to take a breath test, see ORS 813.”
Bergstrom v. Motor Vehs. Div., 799 P.2d 673 (Or. Ct. App. 1990). “100; ORS 813.120. He entered the dates of the license suspension and told respondent those dates.”
State ex rel. Motor Vehs. Div.. v. Norblad, 882 P.2d 598 (Or. 1994). “410(1) provides: “If the Department of Transportation receives from a police officer a report that is in substantial compliance with ORS 813.120, the department shall suspend the driving privileges of the person in this state on the 30th day after the date of arrest unless, at a…”
Fisher v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 125 P.3d 85 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “ORS 813.120(1); ORS 813.410(1). The circuit court determined that DMVs findings were not supported by substantial evidence in the record.”
Owens v. Motor Vehs. Div., 857 P.2d 144 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 3× “410(2) provides, in part: “If [MVD] receives from a police officer a report pursuant to ORS 813.120 that discloses that the person was driving a commercial motor vehicle * * * submitted to [a breath] test and the person’s blood, as shown by the test, had .”
Angeney v. DMV, 490 P.3d 183 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “100(2)(d); see also ORS 813.120 (specifications for report). Upon ODOT’s receipt of such a report, ORS 813.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.120(1) — 4 cases
Supension of Driving Privileges of Cole v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch, 87 P.3d 1120 (Or. 2004). “16 Under the Implied Consent Law, if DMV receives a police report indicating that a driver has been arrested for driving under the influence, ORS 813.120, then DMV is required to suspend the individual’s driver license.”
Coulter v. Oregon Dep't of Transp., Driver & Motor Veh. Servs., 4 P.3d 89 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). “410(1), the report failed to comply substantially with ORS 813.120. Petitioner argued that, according to Dotson, a reasonable objective of ORS 813.”
Fisher v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 125 P.3d 85 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “ORS 813.120(1); ORS 813.410(1). The circuit court determined that DMVs findings were not supported by substantial evidence in the record.”
Murdoch v. DMV, 519 P.3d 115 (Or. 2022).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.120(1)(c) — 2 cases
Coulter v. Oregon Dep't of Transp., Driver & Motor Veh. Servs., 4 P.3d 89 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). “410(1), the report failed to comply substantially with ORS 813.120. Petitioner argued that, according to Dotson, a reasonable objective of ORS 813.”
Hoefling v. Motor Vehs. Div., 799 P.2d 176 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.120(l)(a) — 1 case
Supension of Driving Privileges of Cole v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Branch, 87 P.3d 1120 (Or. 2004). “16 Under the Implied Consent Law, if DMV receives a police report indicating that a driver has been arrested for driving under the influence, ORS 813.120, then DMV is required to suspend the individual’s driver license.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.120(l)(c) — 2 cases
Coulter v. Oregon Dep't of Transp., Driver & Motor Veh. Servs., 4 P.3d 89 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). “410(1), the report failed to comply substantially with ORS 813.120. Petitioner argued that, according to Dotson, a reasonable objective of ORS 813.”
Fisher v. Driver & Motor Veh. Servs. Div., 125 P.3d 85 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “ORS 813.120(1); ORS 813.410(1). The circuit court determined that DMVs findings were not supported by substantial evidence in the record.”
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.