815.280
Violation of bicycle equipment requirements; penalty. (1) A person commits the offense
of violation of bicycle equipment requirements if the person does any of the
following:
(a) Operates on
any highway a bicycle in violation of the requirements of this section.
(b) Is the parent
or guardian of a minor child or ward and authorizes or knowingly permits the
child or ward to operate a bicycle on any highway in violation of the
requirements of this section.
(2) A bicycle is
operated in violation of the requirements of this section if any of the
following requirements are violated:
(a) A bicycle
must be equipped with a brake that enables the operator of the bicycle to stop
the bicycle within 15 feet from a speed of 10 miles per hour on dry, level,
clean pavement.
(b) A person
shall not install or use any siren or whistle upon a bicycle. This paragraph
does not apply to bicycles used by police officers.
(c) At the times
described in the following, a bicycle or its rider must be equipped with
lighting equipment that meets the described requirements:
(A) The lighting
equipment must be used during limited visibility conditions.
(B) The lighting
equipment must show a white light visible from a distance of at least 500 feet
to the front of the bicycle.
(C) The lighting
equipment must have a red reflector or lighting device or material of such size
or characteristic and so mounted as to be visible from all distances up to 600
feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful lower beams of headlights on
a motor vehicle.
(3) Nothing
contained in this section shall be construed to prohibit the use of additional
parts and accessories on any bicycle consistent with this section.
(4) The offense
described in this section, violation of bicycle equipment requirements, is a
Class D traffic violation. [1983 c.338 §502; 1985 c.16 §260; 1985 c.69 §5; 2003
c.158 §15; 2003 c.341 §17; 2007 c.821 §1; 2015 c.138 §27]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1989–2023 · leading case:
State v. Leino
State v. Civil (2023)
orctapp
“Inman initiated a traffic stop, because he believed that defendant was violating ORS 815.280, which requires riding with proper lighting equipment.”
State v. Civil (2023)
orctapp
“Inman initiated a traffic stop, because he believed that defendant was violating ORS 815.280, which requires riding with proper lighting equipment.”
State v. Leino (2012)
orctapp · cites it 2×
“Operating a bicycle without a light in the circumstances at issue in this case is a traffic violation, ORS 815.280, and a police officer “[m]ay stop and detain a person for a traffic violation for the purposes of investigation reasonably related to the traffic violation,…”
State v. Jones (2010)
orctapp · cites it 2×
“1 Russick also saw that defendant did not have a functioning light on his bicycle, in violation of ORS 815.280. 2 As Russick passed defendant in his police cruiser, Russick noticed that defendant resembled an individual whom Russick knew had a felony warrant out for his arrest,…”
State v. Deneen (2010)
orctapp
“1 ORS 815.280 provides that riding a bicycle without required lighting equipment is a Class D traffic violation.”
Child v. City of Portland (2008)
ord
“) Defendant Officers “issued [P]laintiff a citation for riding her bicycle without a light pursuant to ORS 815.280 and ... interfering with a police officer pursuant to ORS 162.”
State v. Elverud (1998)
orctapp · cites it 2×
“See ORS 815.280(2)(c). He also asked defendant for identification, and he ran the identification “through dispatch.”
State v. Schellhorn (1989)
orctapp
“” Defendant concedes that the initial stop in this case was valid, because he was riding a bicycle without a light, in violation of ORS 815.280. However, he argues that the seizure of the purse and the ensuing frisk and search were unlawful.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 815.280(2) — 1 case
State v. Jones (2010)
orctapp
“1 Russick also saw that defendant did not have a functioning light on his bicycle, in violation of ORS 815.280. 2 As Russick passed defendant in his police cruiser, Russick noticed that defendant resembled an individual whom Russick knew had a felony warrant out for his arrest,…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 815.280(2)(c) — 2 cases
State v. Leino (2012)
orctapp
“Operating a bicycle without a light in the circumstances at issue in this case is a traffic violation, ORS 815.280, and a police officer “[m]ay stop and detain a person for a traffic violation for the purposes of investigation reasonably related to the traffic violation,…”
State v. Elverud (1998)
orctapp
“See ORS 815.280(2)(c). He also asked defendant for identification, and he ran the identification “through dispatch.”
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.