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

Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.328 (2026)

Notice of intent to challenge validity of prior convictions

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

      813.328 Notice of intent to challenge validity of prior convictions. (1) A defendant who challenges the validity of prior convictions alleged by the state as an element of felony driving while under the influence of intoxicants must give notice of the intent to challenge the validity of the prior convictions at least seven days prior to the first date set for trial on the felony charge. The validity of the prior convictions shall be determined prior to trial by the court.

      (2) As used in this section, “conviction” includes a juvenile adjudication. [1999 c.1049 §4; 2009 c.525 §3]

 

SUSPENSION

(For Conviction)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2004–2018 · leading case: State v. Probst, 124 P.3d 1237 (Or. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Probst, 124 P.3d 1237 (Or. 2005). · cites it 3× “*625 Of all the statutes, ORS 813.328 comes closest to the point. It provides: “A defendant who challenges the validity of prior convictions alleged by the state [pursuant to ORS 813.”
State v. Jacob, 145 P.3d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 10× “The defendant relied chiefly on the provisions of ORS 813.328. That statute requires that a defendant give notice of the intent to challenge the validity of the prior convictions at least seven days before trial and that "[t]he validity of the prior convictions shall be…”
State v. Hamann, 422 P.3d 193 (Or. 2018). “See ORS 813.328(1) (a defendant may challenge "the validity of prior convictions alleged by the state" as an element of felony DUII).”
State v. Jacob, 180 P.3d 6 (Or. 2008). “As noted by the court, a related statute, ORS 813.328, specifically contemplated that a defendant could choose to challenge the validity of prior DUII convictions and required that the defendant give notice if the defendant chose to mount such a challenge.”
State v. Probst, 85 P.3d 313 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “” However, it does not address the particular issue at hand.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.328(1) — 1 case
State v. Hamann, 422 P.3d 193 (Or. 2018). “See ORS 813.328(1) (a defendant may challenge "the validity of prior convictions alleged by the state" as an element of felony DUII).”
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.