Driving Under the Influence of Intoxicants

ORS 813.260
Designation of agencies to perform screening interviews

  • duties of agency


(1)

Courts having jurisdiction over driving while under the influence of intoxicants offenses shall designate agencies or organizations to perform the screening interview and treatment required under driving while under the influence of intoxicants diversion agreements described in ORS 813.200 (Notice of availability of diversion). The designated agencies or organizations must meet minimum standards established pursuant to ORS 430.357 (Minimum standards) to perform the screening interview and treatment of problem drinking, alcoholism and drug dependency and must be certified by the Director of the Oregon Health Authority. Wherever possible a court shall designate agencies or organizations to perform the screening interview that are separate from those that may be designated to carry out a program of treatment.

(2)

Monitoring of a defendant’s progress under a diversion agreement shall be the responsibility of the agency or organization performing the screening interview. The agency or organization shall make a report to the court stating the defendant’s successful completion or failure to complete all or any part of the treatment program specified by the screening interview. The form of the report shall be determined by agreement between the court and the agency or organization performing the screening interview. The court shall make the report of the agency or organization performing the screening interview that is required by this subsection a part of the record of the case. [1983 c.338 §375; 1991 c.557 §7; 2009 c.595 §1144; 2011 c.673 §43; 2015 c.318 §54]

Notes of Decisions

State failed to show that police had authority to stop defendant based on reasonable suspicion that defendant was in violation of conditions of diversion agreement because statutory permission to "monitor" defendant's progress under diversion agreement is not sufficiently similar to authority to "arrest" defendent without warrant. State v. Chambers, 287 Or App 840, 404 P3d 1122 (2017)

§§ 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