2017 ORS 811.175¹
Violation driving while suspended or revoked
  • penalties

This section is amended
Effective January 1, 2019
Relating to driving privileges; creating new provisions; amending ORS 163.196, 164.775, 165.805, 430.165, 430.197, 801.250, 802.170, 802.550, 807.020, 807.200, 807.240, 807.370, 809.135, 809.260, 809.275, 809.280, 809.310, 809.312, 809.380, 809.390, 809.409, 809.411, 809.415, 809.416, 809.600, 811.175, 811.182, 813.040 and 813.520; and repealing ORS 339.254, 339.257, 807.250, 807.252, 807.260, 807.270, 809.265, 809.423, 809.650, 809.660, 813.500 and 813.510.

(1) A person commits the offense of violation driving while suspended or revoked if the person does any of the following:

(a) Drives a motor vehicle upon a highway during a period when the person’s driving privileges or right to apply for driving privileges have been suspended or revoked in this state by a court or by the Department of Transportation.

(b) Drives a motor vehicle outside the limitations of a probationary permit issued under ORS 807.270 (Probationary driver permit) or a hardship driver permit issued under ORS 807.240 (Hardship permit), including any limitations placed on the permit under ORS 813.510 (Limitations on privileges granted by permit).

(c) Drives a commercial motor vehicle upon a highway during a period when the person’s driving privileges or commercial driving privileges have been suspended or revoked in this state or any other jurisdiction.

(2) Affirmative defenses to the offense described in this section are established under ORS 811.180 (Affirmative defenses).

(3) The offense described in this section is applicable upon any premises open to the public.

(4) The offense described in this section, violation driving while suspended or revoked, is a Class A traffic violation except as otherwise provided in ORS 811.182 (Criminal driving while suspended or revoked). [1983 c.338 §598; 1985 c.16 §304; 1987 c.730 §1; 1987 c.801 §9; 1989 c.171 §91; 1989 c.636 §45; 1997 c.249 §228; 1999 c.1051 §90; 2009 c.395 §10]

Notes of Decisions

Legislature intended that separate sen­tences were permissible for driving under influence of intoxicants and driving while suspended when they arise out of same driving episode. State v. Hale, 80 Or App 361, 722 P2d 1269 (1986)

Defendant in driving while suspended case is entitled to collaterally attack underlying con­vic­­tions on which habitual traffic offender status is based. State v. Gilbert, 87 Or App 484, 742 P2d 713 (1987)

Where defendant volunteered in­for­ma­­tion about automobile accident, stated that he had been driving and that he was driving in viola­tion of restric­tions placed on his driver license, provided his driver license number, made state­ment about cause of accident and state­ments re­gard­ing restric­tions on license, such evidence, in pros­e­cu­­tion for driving while suspended, was “some proof” other than defendant’s confession which corroborated confession that he had been driving. State v. Manzella, 88 Or App 258, 744 P2d 1321 (1987), aff’d 306 Or 303, 759 P2d 1078 (1988)

Where there is no evidence that defendants’ driver licenses were suspended or revoked for any reason in ORS 811.182 (Criminal driving while suspended or revoked), which would make of­fenses misdemeanors, and defendants were tried in district court, which does not have felony jurisdic­tion, court only had statutory authority to enter judg­ments for infrac­tion driving while suspended or revoked under this pro­vi­sion. State v. Conlon/Manning, 108 Or App 141, 813 P2d 1132 (1991)

Defendant’s guilty plea to driving infrac­tion of driving uninsured did not preclude pros­e­cu­­tion for driving while suspended or revoked. State v. Lazaro, 113 Or App 330, 832 P2d 1259 (1992), Sup Ct review denied

Misdemeanor driving while suspended is not lesser included charge of felony driving while suspended. State v. Edwards, 123 Or App 519, 860 P2d 846 (1993)

Revoca­tion terminates after statutory period so that driver assumes status of being unlicensed but not revoked. State v. Hammerton/Walmsley, 320 Or 454, 886 P2d 1012 (1994)

Where indict­ment fails to allege driving privileges were suspended in Oregon, identity of suspending entity is ma­te­ri­al ele­ment of of­fense. State v. Newman, 179 Or App 1, 39 P3d 874 (2002); State v. Crawford, 179 Or App 160, 39 P3d 917 (2002)

Chapter 811

See also annota­tions under ORS chapter 483 in permanent edi­tion.

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statute

A party in viola­tion of a motor vehicle statute is neg­li­gent as a matter of law unless he introduces evidence from which the trier of fact could find that he was acting as a reasonably prudent per­son under the circumstances. Barnum v. Williams, 264 Or 71, 504 P2d 122 (1972)

Law Review Cita­tions

Under Former Similar Statute

10 WLJ 207 (1974)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 811—Rules of the Road for Drivers, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors811.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 811, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano811.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
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.