State v. Dickas

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Traffic Infractions
  • Date Filed: 12-21-2016
  • Case #: A156174
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; Hadlock, C.J.; & Tookey, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

Under ORS 810.441(2), authorizes ODOT to contract with a state agency, to "operate photo radar within the highway work zone . . . located on a state highway."

Defendant appealed a judgment which found Defendant guilty of violating the posted speed limit, ORS 811.111. On appeal, Defendant argued that 810.441(2) (the photo-radar statute in contention) was unconstitutional and violated Article IV, Section 23, of the Oregon Constitution, and therefore the trial court should have dismissed his citation. Under ORS 810.441(2), authorizes ODOT to contract with a state agency, to "operate photo radar within the highway work zone . . . located on a state highway." In general language, a local statute may be said to be one that is operative only within a portion of a state. A law which applies only to a limited part of the state, and the inhabitants of that part is local. In this case Defendant was cited for speeding on a highway under ORS 810.441(2) which does not apply solely to drivers on that highway that are inhabitant of a limited part of the state. Affirmed.

Advanced Search