Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants

ORS 813.250
Motion to dismiss charge on completion of diversion

  • admissibility of statements


(1)

At any time after the conclusion of the period of a driving while under the influence of intoxicants diversion agreement described in ORS 813.230 (Diversion agreement), a defendant who has fully complied with and performed the conditions of the diversion agreement may apply by motion to the court wherein the diversion agreement was entered for an order dismissing the charge with prejudice.

(2)

The defendant shall cause to be served on the district attorney or city attorney a copy of the motion for entry of an order dismissing with prejudice the charge of driving while under the influence of intoxicants. The motion shall be served on the district attorney or city attorney at the time it is filed with the court. The district attorney or city attorney may contest the motion.

(3)

If the defendant does not appear as provided by subsection (1) of this section within six months after the conclusion of the diversion period, and if the court finds that the defendant fully complied with and performed the conditions of the diversion agreement, and if it gives notice of that finding to the district attorney or city attorney the court may on its own motion enter an order dismissing the charge of driving while under the influence of intoxicants with prejudice.

(4)

No statement made by the defendant about the offense with which the defendant is charged shall be offered or received in evidence in any criminal or civil action or proceeding arising out of the same conduct which is the basis of the charge of driving while under the influence of intoxicants, if the statement was made during the course of the screening interview or treatment program and to a person employed by the program. [1983 c.338 §374; 1985 c.16 §195; 1987 c.441 §7; 2015 c.318 §53]

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statute

Trial court's revocation of diversion agreement, which provided that defendant was not to use intoxicants while driving, was proper because defendant admitted that she had subsequently been arrested for drunk driving and had refused to take breath test. State v. Hunter, 67 Or App 783, 680 P2d 3 (1984)

§§ 813.200 to 813.270

Notes of Decisions

Effect of defendant's previous participation in diversion program is not affected by whether or not he acted on counsel's advice. State v. Maynard, 85 Or App 631, 738 P2d 210 (1987), Sup Ct review denied

Law Review Citations

20 WLR 319 (1984)


Source

Last accessed
Jun. 26, 2021