813.300 Use of
blood alcohol percentage as evidence; percentage required for being under the
influence. (1) At
the trial of any civil or criminal action, suit or proceeding arising out of
the acts committed by a person driving a motor vehicle while under the
influence of intoxicants, if the amount of alcohol in the person’s blood at the
time alleged is less than 0.08 percent by weight of alcohol as shown by
chemical analysis of the person’s breath or blood, it is indirect evidence that
may be used with other evidence, if any, to determine whether or not the person
was then under the influence of intoxicants.
(2) Not less than
0.08 percent by weight of alcohol in a person’s blood constitutes being under
the influence of intoxicating liquor.
(3)
Notwithstanding subsection (2) of this section, for purposes of the Motorist
Implied Consent Law as defined in ORS 801.010, for a person who is under 21
years of age, any amount of alcohol in the blood constitutes being under the
influence of intoxicating liquor.
(4) Percent by
weight of alcohol in the blood shall be based upon grams of alcohol per 100
milliliters of blood or based upon grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath.
(5) ORS 813.010
(1)(c) may not be construed to limit the admissibility of any evidence of the
amount of alcohol in a person’s blood as shown by chemical analysis of the
person’s breath or blood, in any civil or criminal action, suit or proceeding
arising out of the acts committed by the person driving a vehicle while under
the influence of intoxicants. [1983 c.338 §590; 1985 c.16 §297; 1989 c.715 §7;
1991 c.860 §8; 2011 c.260 §1; 2021 c.480 §3; 2023 c.498 §14]
Notes of Decisions
State v. Eumana-moranchel, 277 P.3d 549 (Or. 2012).
· cites it 14× “100 provides, in part: "(3) If a person refuses to take a test under this section or if a breath test under this section discloses that the person, at the time of the test, had a level of alcohol in the person's blood that constitutes being under the influence of intoxicating…”
State v. Balderson, 910 P.2d 1138 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 28× “OAR 257-30-020(1)(b) was adopted pursuant to ORS 813.300 and ORS 813.160(1)(b). ORS 813.”
State v. Snyder, 97 P.3d 1181 (Or. 2004).
· cites it 9× “320 provides, in part: “(1) The provisions of the implied consent law, except ORS 813.300, shall not be construed by any court to limit the introduction of otherwise competent, relevant evidence in any civil action, suit or proceedings or in any criminal action other than a…”
State v. MacHuca, 218 P.3d 145 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 4× “"(3) If a person refuses to take a test under this section or if a breath test under this section discloses that the person, at the time of the test, had a level of alcohol in the person's blood that constitutes being under the influence of intoxicating liquor under ORS 813.300,…”
State v. King, 852 P.2d 190 (Or. 1993).
· cites it 4× “ORS 813.300 establishes that BAC test results are admissible in civil or criminal actions.”
State v. King, 834 P.2d 463 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 12× “ORS 813.300 describes how the blood alcohol reading can be used as evidence.”
State v. Martin, 477 P.3d 452 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
· cites it 4× “” In the same section as the argument above, defendant con- tended that the blood-alcohol test results could not be used to prove DUII under ORS 813.300 because there was no 400 State v.”
State v. Helgeson, 185 P.3d 545 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 4× “160(1) provides that chemical analysis is valid under ORS 813.300 if a number of requirements relating to testing methods are met.”
State v. Milligan, 748 P.2d 130 (Or. 1988).
· cites it 2× “320 provides: "The provisions of the implied consent law, except ORS 813.300 [not relevant here], shall not be construed by any court to limit the introduction of otherwise competent, relevant evidence in any civil action, suit or proceedings or in any criminal action other than…”
State v. Trenary, 836 P.2d 739 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 4× “410." ORS 813.320 controls the admissibility of breath test results under the Implied Consent Law.”
State v. Moylett, 836 P.2d 1329 (Or. 1992).
· cites it 2× “320 provides: "The provisions of the implied consent law, except ORS 813.300 [which is not pertinent in this case], shall not be construed by any court to limit the introduction of otherwise competent, relevant evidence in any civil action, suit or proceedings or in any criminal…”
State v. Schneider, 120 P.3d 16 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 2× “” ORS 813.300(2). We conclude that the state is correct in each respect.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.300(1) — 5 cases
State v. Eumana-moranchel, 277 P.3d 549 (Or. 2012).
“100 provides, in part: "(3) If a person refuses to take a test under this section or if a breath test under this section discloses that the person, at the time of the test, had a level of alcohol in the person's blood that constitutes being under the influence of intoxicating…”
State v. Balderson, 910 P.2d 1138 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“OAR 257-30-020(1)(b) was adopted pursuant to ORS 813.300 and ORS 813.160(1)(b). ORS 813.”
State v. Martin, 477 P.3d 452 (Or. Ct. App. 2020).
“” In the same section as the argument above, defendant con- tended that the blood-alcohol test results could not be used to prove DUII under ORS 813.300 because there was no 400 State v.”
State v. Helgeson, 185 P.3d 545 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“160(1) provides that chemical analysis is valid under ORS 813.300 if a number of requirements relating to testing methods are met.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.300(2) — 8 cases
State v. Snyder, 97 P.3d 1181 (Or. 2004).
“320 provides, in part: “(1) The provisions of the implied consent law, except ORS 813.300, shall not be construed by any court to limit the introduction of otherwise competent, relevant evidence in any civil action, suit or proceedings or in any criminal action other than a…”
State v. Schneider, 120 P.3d 16 (Or. Ct. App. 2005).
“” ORS 813.300(2). We conclude that the state is correct in each respect.”
State v. King, 834 P.2d 463 (Or. Ct. App. 1992).
“ORS 813.300 describes how the blood alcohol reading can be used as evidence.”
State v. King, 852 P.2d 190 (Or. 1993).
“ORS 813.300 establishes that BAC test results are admissible in civil or criminal actions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.300(3) — 3 cases
State v. King, 852 P.2d 190 (Or. 1993).
“ORS 813.300 establishes that BAC test results are admissible in civil or criminal actions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.300(4) — 1 case
State v. Helgeson, 185 P.3d 545 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“160(1) provides that chemical analysis is valid under ORS 813.300 if a number of requirements relating to testing methods are met.”
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.