State v. Potter
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the Court
K1STLER, J.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction for impeding traffic and failing to use a bicycle lane. He contends that a bicyclist cannot be convicted of impeding traffic and that there was no evidence that the city had determined that the bicycle lane was suitable for safe bicycle use, as required by statute. We affirm.
Defendant participated in a Critical Mass bicycle ride. He was one of several bicyclists who were traveling westbound on the Hawthorne Bridge towards downtown Portland. There is a marked bicycle lane on the bridge. The bicyclists, however, were occupying both of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Bureau of Labor & IndustriesOregon Supreme Court · 1993
- State v. StillingOregon Supreme Court · 1979
- Gladhart v. Oregon Vineyard Supply Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 2001
- Armstrong v. Rogue Federal Credit UnionOregon Supreme Court · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. TiffinCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2005
- State v. DahlCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2002