813.150
Chemical test at request of arrested person. In addition to a chemical test of the breath, blood
or urine administered under ORS 813.100 or 813.140, upon the request of a
police officer, a person shall be permitted upon request, at the person’s own
expense, reasonable opportunity to have any licensed physician and surgeon,
licensed professional nurse or qualified technician, chemist or other qualified
person of the person’s own choosing administer a chemical test or tests of the
person’s breath or blood for the purpose of determining the alcoholic content
of the person’s blood or a chemical test or tests of the person’s blood or
urine, or both, for the purpose of determining the presence of cannabis,
psilocybin, a controlled substance or an inhalant in the person. The failure or
inability to obtain such a test or tests by a person shall not preclude the
admission of evidence relating to a test or tests taken upon the request of a
police officer. [1983 c.338 §594; 1985 c.16 §300; 1999 c.619 §12; 2017 c.21 §84;
2021 c.253 §10]
Notes of Decisions
State v. Eumana-moranchel, 277 P.3d 549 (Or. 2012).
· cites it 2× “140, or ORS 813.150 must itself show that a person has a BAC of .”
State v. Darlin, 857 P.2d 859 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 4× “He acknowledged that it would have been possible to transport defendant in restraints, but said that, given her unpredictably violent behavior, he believed that she remained a threat to herself, the escorting officers and the medical staff who would have administered the blood…”
State v. Chakerian, 2018 NMSC 19 (N.M. 2018).
“”); Oregon, Ore. Rev. Stat. § 813.150 (2017) (“[A] person shall be permitted upon request, at the person’s own expense, reasonable opportunity to have any licensed physician and surgeon, licensed professional nurse or qualified technician, chemist or other qualified person of…”
State v. King, 834 P.2d 463 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 4× “140 or ORS 813.150. It is not necessary that the jurors all agree on one body of evidence or the credibility of a witness in order to agree unanimously that a defendant was under the influence of intoxicants.”
State v. Snuggerud, 956 P.2d 1015 (Or. Ct. App. 1998).
· cites it 3× “In its fifth and final assignment of error, the state argues that the trial court erred in excluding the Intoxilyzer results on the ground that Bennett had interfered with defendant’s entitlement to obtain a blood test under ORS 813.150. That statute provides: “In addition to a…”
State v. Helgeson, 185 P.3d 545 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“ORS 813.150 allows a person to request and receive a chemical test of his or her blood (in addition to the chemical test of the breath) provided certain conditions have been met.”
Murdoch v. DMV, 492 P.3d 89 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
“” Additionally, ORS 813.150 provides: “In addition to a chemical test of the breath, blood or urine administered under ORS 813.”
State v. Davis, 292 P.3d 666 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 11× “Defendant argues that the results should be suppressed because she was denied a reasonable opportunity to obtain an independent blood test, in violation of ORS 813.150. 1 The state responds that defendant was not denied a reasonable opportunity to take the blood test because she…”
State v. Allen, 802 P.2d 690 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“) See also ORS 813.150. If a defendant wishes to offer evidence that his partition coefficient is other than 2100:1, he is free to do so.”
Ahlbin v. Motor Vehs. Div., 833 P.2d 1291 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“Under ORS 813.150, a motorist is entitled to ablood test only after submitting to a breath test.”
State v. Leach, 767 P.2d 463 (Or. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 3× “The administration of a second breath test at a suspect’s request is contemplated by ORS 813.150, 1 but the result is not admissible over a defendant’s objection under the version of ORS 813.”
State v. Wildeboer, 566 P.3d 1149 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
“See ORS 813.150. The state reasoned that this was not a case in which the state had better evidence in its possession than it offered at trial.”
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.