Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 811 § 811.180 — Affirmative defenses

Affirmative defenses. The following establishes affirmative defenses in prosecutions for driving while suspended or revoked in violation of ORS 811.175 or 811.182 and describes when the affirmative defenses are not available: (1) In addition to other defenses provided by law, including but not limited to ORS 161.200, it is an affirmative defense to the offenses described in ORS 811.175 and 811.182 that: (a) An injury or immediate threat of injury to a human being or animal, and the urgency of the circumstances made it necessary for the defendant to drive a motor vehicle at the time and place in question; or (b) The defendant had not received notice of the defendant’s suspension or revocation or been informed of the suspension or revocation by a trial judge who ordered a suspension or revocation of the defendant’s driving privileges or right to apply. (2) The affirmative defenses described in subsection (1)(b) of this section are not available to a defendant under the circumstances described in this subsection. Any of the evidence specified in this subsection may be offered in the prosecution’s case in chief. This subsection applies if any of the following circumstances exist: (a) The defendant refused to accept a notification provided by the department, including refusing to sign a receipt for the certified mail containing the notice of suspension or revocation. (b) The notice of suspension or revocation could not be delivered to the defendant because the defendant failed to comply with the requirements under ORS 807.560 to notify the Department of Transportation of a change of address or residence. (c) At a previous court appearance, the defendant had been informed by a trial judge that the judge was ordering a suspension or revocation of the defendant’s driving privileges or right to apply. (d) The defendant had actual knowledge of the suspension or revocation by any means prior to the time the defendant was stopped on the current charge. (e) The defendant was provided with notice of intent to suspend under ORS 813.100. [1983 c.338 §599; 1985 c.16 §305; 1985 c.672 §18; 1985 c.744 §1; 1987 c.138 §2; 1987 c.158 §168; 1987 c.730 §20; 1987 c.801 §10; 1997 c.249 §229; 2019 c.312 §25]