2007 ORS § 810.410¹

Arrest and citation

(1) A police officer may arrest or issue a citation to a person for a traffic crime at any place within or outside the jurisdictional authority of the governmental unit by which the police officer is authorized to act as provided by ORS 133.235 (Arrest by peace officer) and 133.310 (Authority of peace officer to arrest without warrant).

(2) A police officer may issue a citation to a person for a traffic violation at any place within or outside the jurisdictional authority of the governmental unit by which the police officer is authorized to act:

(a) When the traffic violation is committed in the police officer’s presence; or

(b) When the police officer has probable cause to believe an offense has occurred based on a description of the vehicle or other information received from a police officer who observed the traffic violation.

(3) A police officer:

(a) Shall not arrest a person for a traffic violation.

(b) May stop and detain a person for a traffic violation for the purposes of investigation reasonably related to the traffic violation, identification and issuance of citation.

(c) May make an inquiry into circumstances arising during the course of a detention and investigation under paragraph (b) of this subsection that give rise to a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

(d) May make an inquiry to ensure the safety of the officer, the person stopped or other persons present, including an inquiry regarding the presence of weapons.

(e) May request consent to search in relation to the circumstances referred to in paragraph (c) of this subsection or to search for items of evidence otherwise subject to search or seizure under ORS 133.535 (Permissible objects of search and seizure).

(f) May use the degree of force reasonably necessary to make the stop and ensure the safety of the peace officer, the person stopped or other persons present.

(g) May make an arrest of a person as authorized by ORS 133.310 (Authority of peace officer to arrest without warrant) (2) if the person is stopped and detained pursuant to the authority of this section.

(4) When a police officer at the scene of a traffic accident has reasonable grounds, based upon the police officer’s personal investigation, to believe that a person involved in the accident has committed a traffic offense in connection with the accident, the police officer may issue to the person a citation for that offense. The authority under this subsection is in addition to any other authority to issue a citation for a traffic offense. [1983 c.338 §400; 1985 c.16 §212; 1991 c.720 §1; 1995 c.308 §1; 1997 c.682 §1; 1997 c.866 §§4,5; 1999 c.1051 §89]

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statute

Where conflicting in­for­ma­­tion was given concerning defendant's identity after he was stopped for a traffic viola­tion, taking him into custody in order to determine his identity was not unreasonable. State v. Tucker, 286 Or 485, 595 P2d 1364 (1979)

This sec­tion allows only those officials who have observed infrac­tion or who are on scene of accident and have per­sonally investigated cause of accident to issue cita­tions and to detain people; where no cita­tion can be issued deten­tion is not authorized. State v. Painter, 296 Or 422, 676 P2d 309 (1984)

In General

Where evidence showed that tribal law incorporated Oregon law concerning arrest for drunken driving, allowing arrest if of­fi­cer has probable cause to believe per­son has committed major traffic of­fense, tribal of­fi­cer was authorized to make such arrest. United States v. Strong, 778 F2d 1393 (1985)

Where Oregon State Police cadet observed open bottle of beer on ground beside car defendant had just left, cadet reasonably concluded that defendant had committed an "open container" infrac­tion in cadet's presence; therefore, cadet was entitled to detain defendant for purposes of ascertaining defendant's identity and to obtain other in­for­ma­­tion. State v. Horton, 86 Or App 199, 738 P2d 609 (1987)

Although of­fi­cer did not know that South Dakota law re­quired two license plates on vehicle, stop of defendant for displaying only one South Dakota license plate provided probable cause to believe traffic infrac­tion had been committed in his presence. State v. Baer, 97 Or App 467, 776 P2d 876 (1989)

Where of­fi­cer lawfully stopped defendant "for the purposes of investiga­tion reasonably related to the apparent traffic infrac­tion" of operating a vehicle without license plates, and observed temporary permit, justifica­tion for investiga­tion reasonably related to stop was vitiated and of­fi­cer had no statutory authority to make operator's license check. State v. Farley, 308 Or 91, 775 P2d 835 (1989)

Officer does not lose authority to make traffic stop by waiting fifteen minutes after witnessing infrac­tion and so long as of­fi­cer's ac­tions are consistent with those of of­fi­cer investigating traffic infrac­tion, fact that of­fi­cer has addi­tional purposes for making stop does not invalidate it. State v. Olaiz, 100 Or App 380, 786 P2d 734 (1990), Sup Ct review denied

Trial court erred in denying defendant's mo­tion to suppress evidence obtained in search during lawful stop because of­fi­cer's authority to detain stopped per­son ends when reason for stop no longer exists. State v. Porter, 312 Or 112, 817 P2d 1306 (1991); State v. Dow, 116 Or App 542, 842 P2d 430 (1992); State v. Dominguez-Martinez, 321 Or 206, 895 P2d 306 (1995); State v. Aguilar, 139 Or App 175, 912 P2d 379 (1996), Sup Ct review denied; State v. Foster, 139 Or App 303, 912 P2d 377 (1996), Sup Ct review denied

Investiga­tion of traffic infrac­tion must be reasonably related to infrac­tion, identifica­tion and issuance of cita­tion and where arrest of driver and search of car was product of defendant's unlawful removal and handcuffing, evidence discovered during search should have been suppressed. State v. Faccio, 114 Or App 112, 834 P2d 485 (1992)

Officer who lawfully stopped car in which defendant was passenger lacked authority to ask for con­sent to search or to search accoutre­ment when request was made solely on basis of traffic infrac­tion. State v. Bucholz, 114 Or App 624, 836 P2d 180 (1992); State v. Wright, 152 Or App 282, 954 P2d 809 (1998), Sup Ct review denied

When police of­fi­cer saw defendant who was stopped for speeding viola­tion reach into glove compart­ment, remove rolled-up bag and tuck bag into sock, observa­tions and police of­fi­cer's knowledge and experience supported reasonable suspicion defendant possessed drugs or drug paraphernalia and allowed of­fi­cer to ques­tion defendant about what of­fi­cer had seen. State v. Frias, 115 Or App 149, 836 P2d 1367 (1992)

ORS 131.615 (Stopping of persons) and this sec­tion provided authority for of­fi­cer to open door of motor vehicle when of­fi­cer observed motor vehicle oddly parked and discovered defendant slumped in driver's seat with driver's door slightly open and engine running. State v. Rhodes, 315 Or 191, 843 P2d 927 (1992)

Mere possibility defendant was in viola­tion of statute was not probable cause allowing stopping of vehicle. State v. Rivera, 121 Or App 246, 855 P2d 188 (1993)

Reasonable basis for suspecting that infrac­tion has occurred is sufficient to permit stop. State v. Matthews, 126 Or App 154, 868 P2d 14 (1994), aff'd 320 Or 398, 884 P2d 1224 (1994)

Reasonable suspicion that defendant has committed illegal acts is proper standard for permitting of­fi­cer to broaden scope of investiga­tion during traffic stop. State v. Aguilar, 139 Or App 175, 912 P2d 379 (1996), Sup Ct review denied

Where passenger commits traffic infrac­tion, limita­tion on permissible scope of traffic stop applies to ques­tioning of passenger. State v. Jones, 141 Or App 63, 918 P2d 111 (1996)

Where of­fi­cer announces to individual that of­fi­cer observed individual breaking law, encounter is stop. State v. Terhear/Goemmel, 142 Or App 450, 923 P2d 641 (1996)

Reten­tion of valuable prop­erty extends dura­tion of stop whether or not reten­tion impairs mobility of stopped per­son. State v. Bailey, 143 Or App 285, 924 P2d 833 (1996)

Nervous behavior of driver is insufficient by itself to raise of­fi­cer safety concerns and allow expansion of stop. State v. Peterson, 143 Or App 505, 923 P2d 1340 (1996), Sup Ct review denied

Traffic stop has ended if per­son stopped has been given objectively reasonable opportunity to leave. State v. Hadley, 146 Or App 166, 932 P2d 1194 (1997); State v. Elverud, 154 Or App 79, 961 P2d 224 (1998), Sup Ct review denied

Where police of­fi­cer lacked reasonable suspicion for expanding scope of traffic stop, of­fi­cer leaning head into interior of vehicle while con­ducting stop was unreasonable search. State v. Hendricks, 151 Or App 271, 948 P2d 740 (1997)

Restric­tion on extension of traffic infrac­tion stop applies to investiga­tion of passengers in stopped vehicle. State v. Taylor, 151 Or App 687, 950 P2d 930 (1997), Sup Ct review denied; State v. Wright, 152 Or App 282, 954 P2d 809 (1998), Sup Ct review denied

Suspicion that passenger is under influence of alcohol or controlled substances does not provide reasonable suspicion for expanding scope of stop. State v. Morton, 151 Or App 734, 951 P2d 179 (1997), Sup Ct review denied

Where unlawful expansion of traffic stop does not impair free will of motorist, search resulting from expansion does not automatically violate pro­hi­bi­­tion in Oregon Constitu­tion against unlawful search and seizure. State v. $113,871 in U.S. Currency, 152 Or App 770, 954 P2d 218 (1998), Sup Ct review denied

Authority of tribal police of­fi­cers to enforce state traffic laws on high­ways running through Indian reserva­tion is not derived from, and is not coextensive with, statutory en­force­­ment authority given "police of­fi­cers." State v. Pamperien, 156 Or App 153, 967 P2d 503 (1998)

Under pre-1997 version of statute, whether per­son is stopped or detained is determined using same methodology applicable for identifying stops and deten­tions under Criminal Procedure Code. State v. Toevs, 327 Or 525, 964 P2d 1007 (1998)

Under pre-1997 version of statute, unlawful deten­tion follows lawful stop where stopped per­son subjectively believes liberty or freedom of move­ment is restrained and belief is objectively reasonable based upon totality of circumstances. State v. Toevs, 327 Or 525, 964 P2d 1007 (1998)

Except as prohibited by United States or Oregon Constitu­tion, ORS 136.432 (Limitation on court's authority to exclude relevant evidence) requires admission of evidence obtained through unlawful expansion of traffic stop. State v. Arabzadeh, 162 Or App 423, 986 P2d 736 (1999)

Officer is not re­quired to have reasonable suspicion for ques­tions to ensure of­fi­cer safety unless ques­tioning rises to level of search or seizure. State v. Amaya, 176 Or App 35, 29 P3d 1177 (2001), aff'd 336 Or 616, 89 P3d 1163 (2004); State v. Crampton, 176 Or App 62, 31 P3d 430 (2001)

Request for con­sent to "search for items of evidence otherwise subject to search or seizure under ORS 133.535 (Permissible objects of search and seizure)" does not require reasonable suspicion of crim­i­nal ac­tivity. State v. Duffy, 176 Or App 49, 29 P3d 1222 (2001), Sup Ct review denied

Police of­fi­cer may not stop per­son pursued outside state for purpose of issuing traffic cita­tion not authorized by foreign state's version of Uniform Act on Fresh Pursuit. State v. Meyer, 183 Or App 536, 53 P3d 940 (2002)

Authoriza­tion for of­fi­cer to make stop related to "traffic viola­tion, identifica­tion and issuance of cita­tion" does not require that of­fi­cer have all three purposes for making stop. Efimoff v. DMV, 204 Or App 648, 131 P3d 814 (2006)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Under Former Similar Statute

Arrest and incarcera­tion of individuals for traffic infrac­tions, (1977) Vol 38, p 960

  • BikePortland.org / Jonathan Maus, Jan 4, 2006
    “...[W]ithout requiring any change in law or policy, Oregon bicyclists already have the legal tools to initiate pros­e­cu­­tion of traffic law breakers. Oregon law allows a citizen to initiate traffic viola­tion pros­e­cu­­tions in state court, AND to have police help...”

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 810—Road Authorities; Courts; Police; Other Enforcement Officials, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­810.­html (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2007, Chapter 810, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­810ano.­htm (2007) (last ac­cessed Feb. 12, 2009).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.