It has been a long time since my last blog. I wish I could report that I decided to take some time out for myself. Just the opposite, I have been more busy than usual in 2010 spending much of my time in the courtrooms. Between arguing motions, attending judicial settlement conferences and going to trial, the months have flown by before I have had a chance to blog again.
The reason I decided to blog now is because my paralegal suggested that with all the success I have been having in trial, I should blog about them. That was my plan until I read my last blog about how the State of Oregon appealed a motion I won in court. I believe a follow up to that case would be appropriate given the emails and responses I got from that last blog.
There has been a lot of new legal developments in 2010 when it comes to DUII laws in Oregon. As I kept up to date with the changes in DUII laws (including the new Oregon Supreme Court decision addressing State v. Machuca), I was concerned with the ruling we would receive from the Oregon Court of Appeals. However, I am happy to report that the Oregon Court of Appeals dismissed the State’s appeal. My client’s driving under the influence of an intoxicant criminal charge is now officially dismissed with prejudice (meaning the State can not pursue this case again).
The Oregon Court of Appeals ruling focused on the jurisdiction of Beaverton Municipal Court. Beaverton Municipal Court in the County of Washington, Sate of Oregon, is a court of record. Therefore ORS 221.359(3) controls. This statute only allows appeals from a criminal judgment. The Oregon Court of Appeals does not have the jurisdiction to overrule the judge’s rulings on pre-trial orders. The State tried to argue that either it should have the same rights to appeal as it does in an Oregon municipal court that is not of record or that the term “judgment” in ORS 221.359(3) should be broadly read to include pre-trail orders suppressing evidence. The Oregon Court of Appeals did not agree with the State’s arguments and ruled in factor of my client dismissing the State’s appeal.
That DUII case was a long hard fought battle with a great result for my client. As mentioned previously, I have had other court battles and trials in 2010. For instance, I recently had a DUII trial where the State brought in a forensic expert from Salem to explain to the jury that my client’s blood alcohol level was a .08 at the time of driving based on retrograde extrapolation. The jury did not find the evidence credible and found my client not guilty of driving under the influence of an intoxicant. I hope to share some interesting details of this trial along with others in my future blogs.
Hope all is well with people reading this blog. They say that attorneys should practice the advise they give to their clients. So my advise is to take time to enjoy the rest of the summer before it passes by.