815.270
Operating vehicle that is loaded or equipped to obstruct driver; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense
of operating a vehicle that is loaded or equipped to obstruct the driver if the
person is operating a vehicle that is loaded or equipped or where baggage or an
encumbrance does any of the following:
(a) Substantially
obstructs the driver’s views to the rear, through one or more mirrors and
otherwise.
(b) Obstructs the
driver’s view to the front or sides.
(c) Interferes
with control of the driving mechanism.
(d) Prevents the
free, unhampered operation of the vehicle by the driver.
(2) The offense
described in this section, vehicle loaded or equipped to obstruct driver, is a
Class C traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §500; 1985 c.16 §259]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
4
cases, 1990–2013 · leading case:
State v. Ordner, 287 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
State v. Ordner, 287 P.3d 1256 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 2× “For the first time on appeal, the state argued, alternatively, that four different statutes provided probable cause to justify the warrantless seizure: ORS 815.270 (operating a vehicle with an obstructed driver), ORS 815.”
State v. Anderson, 314 P.3d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
· cites it 17× “020 or ORS 815.270. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand.”
State v. Zigler, 788 P.2d 484 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
“However, the officer’s reason for suspecting that defendant was committing a crime and for following him in a public place is irrelevant to the lawfulness of the stop.”
State v. Elmore, 250 P.3d 439 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“, ORS 815.270 (operating a vehicle that is loaded or equipped to obstruct the driver), ORS 815.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 815.270(l)(b) — 1 case
State v. Anderson, 314 P.3d 335 (Or. Ct. App. 2013).
“020 or ORS 815.270. For the following reasons, we reverse and remand.”
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.