813.400
Suspension or revocation upon conviction; duration; review; exemptions. (1) Except as provided in
subsections (2) and (3) of this section, upon receipt of a record of conviction
for misdemeanor driving while under the influence of intoxicants, the
Department of Transportation shall suspend the driving privileges of the person
convicted. The suspension shall be for a period described under Schedule II of
ORS 809.428, except the department shall not reinstate any driving privileges
to the person until the person complies with future responsibility filings. A
person is entitled to administrative review under ORS 809.440 of a suspension
imposed under this subsection.
(2) A person
convicted of felony driving while under the influence of intoxicants, or a
person convicted of misdemeanor driving while under the influence of
intoxicants for a third or subsequent time, is subject to revocation of driving
privileges as provided in ORS 809.235.
(3) The
provisions of this section do not apply to convictions of driving while under
the influence of intoxicants if the offense was committed while the person was
riding a bicycle.
(4) For the
purposes of this section, “bicycle” does not include an electric assisted
bicycle. [1983 c.338 §353(8); 1985 c.16 §166(8); 1985 c.393 §10a(8); 1985 c.669
§2a(8); 1991 c.702 §13; 2001 c.786 §3; 2003 c.346 §1; 2003 c.402 §40; 2005
c.436 §2; 2023 c.498 §21]
813.403 [1989 c.636 §40; 1991 c.702 §14;
2003 c.402 §41; repealed by 2013 c.237 §12]
813.404 [1989 c.636 §41; 1991 c.185 §16;
1993 c.305 §5; 1995 c.568 §5; 2003 c.402 §42; 2005 c.649 §25; repealed by 2013
c.237 §12]
(Under Implied Consent
Law)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
19
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1986–2024 · leading case:
State v. Rodriguez, 175 P.3d 471 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Rodriguez, 175 P.3d 471 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 16× “ORS 813.400(1) (2001), amended by Or. Laws 2003, ch.”
Dyrdahl v. Dep't of Transp., 131 P.3d 770 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 14× “When a state’s laws do not define an offense “in precisely the words employed” in the compact, Article IV, section c, allows a state to identify offenses that are “substantially similar” to those described in the compact.”
Wilcox v. Motor Vehs. Div., 750 P.2d 181 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 6× “In an administrative hearing, the referee held that the suspension was valid, pursuant to the provisions of ORS 813.400, 3 ORS 809.420(2) (a) 4 and ORS 809.”
State v. Vazquez-Escobar, 153 P.3d 168 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 813.400(1) (2001), amended by Or Laws 2003, ch 346, § 1; former ORS 809.”
Schreiber v. Motor Vehs. Div., 802 P.2d 706 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “” Petitioner observes, correctly, that California Vehicle Code § 23153(b) allows for a conviction if a driver is on public or private property, but that ORS 813.400 provides for suspension only if the driver operates a vehicle “upon any highway or on premises open to the public.”
State v. Carney, 765 P.2d 232 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “ORS 813.400(2) 1 provides that an individual’s driver’s license may be suspended for DUII in accordance with Schedule II of ORS 809.”
State v. Adams, 717 P.2d 212 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“410; ORS 813.400), effective January 1, 1986; Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 981) provided, in pertinent part: “(1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 482.”
Buck v. Motor Vehs. Div., 723 P.2d 338 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“…by Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 978 (which became effective January 1, 1986, Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 981) and replaced by ORS 813.400, Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 353(8), as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 166(8); Or Laws 1985, ch 393, § 10a(8); and Or Laws 1985, ch 669, § 2a(8). 3…”
State v. Roberts, 172 P.3d 651 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 8× “In so holding, we expressly declined to overrule Wilcox and reinterpret the meaning of ORS 813.400 using the framework of PGE v.”
State v. Benner, 726 P.2d 1209 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“There, as here, MVD sent the defendant a notice which indicated that the revocation would become effective before the time to exercise his statutory right to a pre-revocation hearing had expired.”
Oviedo v. Motor Vehs. Div., 792 P.2d 1244 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“ORS 813.400. The trial court set aside MVD’s order on the basis that it was not proven that he was under arrest for DUII or knew that he was under arrest for DUII at the time defendant took the breath test.”
State v. James, 717 P.2d 214 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).
“…Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 353(8), as amended by Or Laws 1985, ch 16, § 166(8); ch 393, § 10a(8); ch 669, § 2a(8) (now ORS 813.400), effective January 1,1986. Or Laws 1983, ch 338, § 981. The version of former ORS 482.850 in effect at the time defendant’s license was suspended…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.400(1) — 8 cases
Dyrdahl v. Dep't of Transp., 131 P.3d 770 (Or. Ct. App. 2006).
“When a state’s laws do not define an offense “in precisely the words employed” in the compact, Article IV, section c, allows a state to identify offenses that are “substantially similar” to those described in the compact.”
State v. Rodriguez, 175 P.3d 471 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 813.400(1) (2001), amended by Or. Laws 2003, ch.”
State v. Vazquez-Escobar, 153 P.3d 168 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 813.400(1) (2001), amended by Or Laws 2003, ch 346, § 1; former ORS 809.”
Wilcox v. Motor Vehs. Div., 750 P.2d 181 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
“In an administrative hearing, the referee held that the suspension was valid, pursuant to the provisions of ORS 813.400, 3 ORS 809.420(2) (a) 4 and ORS 809.”
Schreiber v. Motor Vehs. Div., 802 P.2d 706 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“” Petitioner observes, correctly, that California Vehicle Code § 23153(b) allows for a conviction if a driver is on public or private property, but that ORS 813.400 provides for suspension only if the driver operates a vehicle “upon any highway or on premises open to the public.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 813.400(2) — 4 cases
State v. Rodriguez, 175 P.3d 471 (Or. Ct. App. 2007).
“ORS 813.400(1) (2001), amended by Or. Laws 2003, ch.”
State v. Carney, 765 P.2d 232 (Or. Ct. App. 1988).
“ORS 813.400(2) 1 provides that an individual’s driver’s license may be suspended for DUII in accordance with Schedule II of ORS 809.”
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.