Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1/23/2002

State v. McBroom

Citations

39 P.3d 226
179 Or. App. 120
2002 Ore. App. LEXIS 24

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that two clauses of Or.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 811.370 “should be read together”
holding that a driver does not violate the statute when he responds to “an apparent hazard” or when he has “some other valid reason for leaving his lane”
noting that the requirement that a driver stay within a lane is “not absolute,” but finding probable cause when the driver drove on but not over the center line
stating that the second provision of Oregon‟s version of Section 123(1) does not permit a motorist to “stray” outside his lane of travel even if the straying is accomplished safely (citing Or. Rev. Stat. § 811.370(1))
driving with tires on the center lane marker for 300 feet violated the statute
driving with tires on the center lane marker for 300 feet violated the statute

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Edmonds, Kistler, Van Hoomissen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.