Congratulations to Angus Dunlavey on a Unlawful Use of a Weapon Trial Win!

Mr. Dunlavey’s client got into an argument, pulled out a gun, pointed the gun at the other person, and pulled the trigger over and over – click, click, click.  It never fired.  The prosecutor decided to bring the charge of Unlawful Use of a Weapon.  The charge the prosecutor decided to bring required the prosecutor to prove that the weapon was ‘dangerous or deadly.’  That phrase, in turn, requires the prosecutor to prove that the gun was ‘presently capable of causing death or serious physical injury.’  Mr. Dunlavey knew this was the key issue for the case. 

Mr. Dunlavey forced the government to examine the gun his client used.  It turned out that the reason that it only clicked and did not fire was that it was damaged and could not hold ammunition.  After the police discovered this problem with the gun, they repaired the gun so that ammunition could enter the chamber. But then the police still had to actively hold the ammunition clip in place even after their repair - so, they could make it work, barely. 

This all means that when Mr. Dunlavey’s client pulled the trigger, the gun did not function and was not, at that time, ‘presently capable of causing death or serious physical injury.’  Once this was proved through the evidence at trial, the judge granted Mr. Dunlavey’s motion to dismiss that charge through a motion called a Motion for Judgement of Acquittal. 

Congratulations to Gabe Walsh on another DV Trial Win!

Mr. Walsh’s client was accused of Class A Harassment (this is the form of Harassment that carries up to 364 days of jail if convicted).  The entire trial revolved around Mr. Walsh’s cross examination of the alleged victim.  During that cross examination, the alleged victim conceded that she was extremely intoxicated during the event, that her memory was therefore suspect, and that Mr. Walsh’s client had not actually ‘harassed’ her through his actions.  At the conclusion of the prosecutor’s evidence, Mr. Walsh made a Motion for Judgement of Acquittal based upon that cross examination.  This type of motion is an argument to the judge that the prosecution’s evidence has failed so badly that the jury should not even have to go to deliberations.  The judge granted Mr. Walsh’ motion and dismissed the case against his client!

Congratulations to Tyler Beach on a 14 Minute Deliberation Jury Trial Win!

Mr. Beach’s client was accused of Harassment (class B). This type of harassment charge carries up to 6 months of jail if convicted. The alleged victim claimed that Mr. Beach’s client had pushed her, and that she fell due to the push.

When he was initially arrested, Mr. Beach’s client denied the allegation. Mr. Beach’s client was eligible for the Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing program but declined that option since he said he didn’t do the crime.

At trial, Mr. Beach proved that before the alleged victim made this claim, she had contacted the police because she wanted out of her lease which had a $4000 early termination penalty. The police told her that if she was the victim of domestic violence that there was a provision in Oregon law that would allow her out of her lease without penalty. Shortly thereafter, she alleged that Mr. Beach’s client pushed her and that it was an act of domestic violence.

After the jury heard Mr. Beach’s cross examination of the alleged victim and his subsequent argument, they returned to the jury room. When a jury returns to the jury room after the completion of evidence and argument, the judge tells them to first select a foreman and then to begin deliberations. Fourteen minutes after returning to the jury room, they signaled to the court that they had obtained a unanimous verdict. We don’t know how much time they spent selecting a foreman versus deciding the case - but we do know that the unanimous decision was Not Guilty.

Congratulations to Joe Metcalfe on an unpopular Jury Trial Win!

Mr. Metcalfe’s client was a face mask protester who was protesting in Eugene.  He got into a scuffle and was charged with Burglary 1, Assault 3, Assault 4, Harassment, Disorderly Conduct, and Trespass 2.  The total incarceration sentence possible if convicted of all charges was 26 years and 6 months.  The trial took place in a college town where, generally speaking, the pool of people for the jury tended to not share the perspective on many things held by Mr. Metcalfe’s client.  At trial, Mr. Metcalfe acknowledged all of the issues with his client and focused the jury on the facts of the case.  The argument was that ‘popular opinions about what happened are not the facts. . . the facts matter’.  Once Mr. Metcalfe finished his trial work, the jury returned Not Guilty findings on the Burglary 1, Assault 3, Assault 4, and Harassment charges.  That left convictions for the two tracking misdemeanors of Disorderly Conduct and Trespass 2.  Those convictions resulted in his client receiving one day of jail rather than years of prison. 

Congratulations to Kylie Cin on a Bench Trial Win!

Ms. Cin’s client didn’t pay his child support obligation.  Failing to do so carries jail up to six months for each time a person is found to have failed to pay.  However, Ms. Cin’s client was unemployed and had no assets.  At trial, Ms. Cin presented evidence that her client had lost his job due to a DUII conviction; and then he lost his home, car, and even his phone.  Ms. Cin offered evidence that showed her client had been actively looking for work, obtained a loner cell phone from the probation office, and was even selling his blood plasma for money for food.  The judge ruled that Ms. Cin’s client had not committed Contempt of Court because he could not possibly have paid. 

Congratulations to Matthew Crusen on another Domestic Violence Trial Win!

Mr. Crusen’s client was accused of Harassment ( with a child witness).  This charge carries up to 364 days of jail.  Essentially, Mr. Crusen’s client was accused of punching/hitting her husband while their son was present and watching the event.  This case was eligible for the Domestic Violence Deferred Sentencing program.  However, Mr. Crusen’s client decided to reject that option and to go to trial. 

At the trial, the prosecutor was unable to get past Mr. Crusen’s objections to the way the prosecutor was trying to get the evidence into the record.  Also, when the investigating officer testified, the officer shared that Mr. Crusen’s client had said she was just defending herself.  So, at the end of the prosecution’s offer of evidence, no evidence had been admitted affirmatively saying that Mr. Crusen’s client had committed the crime and there was evidence in the record saying that she had defended herself.  Accordingly, the judge then granted Mr. Crusen’s motion to dismiss the case. 

Congratulations to Tyler Beach on another Jury Trial Win!

Mr. Beach’s client was accused of Attempt to Elude a Police Officer, DUII, and Reckless Driving.  The total possible prison time, if convicted of all charges, would have been two days short of seven years.  The basic issue was that a police officer saw a car driving at 90 miles per hour and switching lanes in-between other cars.  The officer tried to pull the car over, but the car fled, and the officer didn’t risk public safety by keeping up.  The car was found stopped with no driver present.  The car was register to Mr. Beach’s client and Mr. Beach’s client was subsequently found a half mile from the location.  Mr. Beach’s client was under the influence of marijuana at the time the police found him (Marijuana is also a basis for Oregon DUII charges). 

At trial, Mr. Beach focused the argument on the fact that Mr. Beach’s client was found with a bicycle that could not have fit inside the car (no bike had been attached to the bumper nor roof) and a woman’s purse (Mr. Beach’s client was a man) was also found dropped nearby the car.  So, perhaps it wasn’t Mr. Beach’s client but someone else who drove and it was a coincidence that Mr. Beach’s client was only a half mile from the car when located by the police.  The jury agreed that they could not say beyond a reasonable doubt that the driver was Mr. Beach’s client.  Therefore, the Jury found Mr. Beach’s client Not Guilty of all charges! 

Congratulations to Joe Metcalf on Another Jury Trial Win!

Mr. Metcalf’s client was accused of Harassment. This carries up to six months of jail if convicted. The defense argument was that the alleged victim was the aggressor and all Mr. Metcalf’s client did was hold down her arms as she was coming at him. During Mr. Metcalf’s cross examination of the alleged victim, she testified that she has a short temper and all Mr. Metcalf’s client did was try to calm her down. The case was dismissed after Mr. Metcalf’s cross examination.

Congratulations to Jason Mitchell on another Jury Trial Win!

Mr. Mitchell’s client was accused of Attempted Assault 4 and Harassment.  The maximum jail sentence was one year if convicted of both.  This case was eligible for the deferred sentencing program – but that option would require domestic violence treatment (and other obligations).  So, they went to trial.  At the trial, Mr. Mitchell stressed to the jury that his client’s actions might have been rude and regrettable but that he never intended to injure the alleged victim.  To the judge Mr. Mitchell argued that the prosecutor failed to establish a ‘domestic’ relationship between the two people.  Mr. Mitchell won both arguments!  The jury found his client Not Guilty on the Attempted Assault charge and the Judge ruled that there was not sufficient evidence that there was a domestic relationship.  In the end, Mr. Mitchell’s client avoided the conviction for the Attempted Assault, avoided any jail time, avoided having to do any domestic violence treatment, and only received one year of bench probation for the harassment.  This means that all he needs to do is not commit any other crime in the next year, pay a small fine, and he will be eligible to have the Harassment charge expunged. 

Congratulations to Ryan Lhotsky on a Jury Trial Win!

Mr. Lhotsky’s client was accused of Assault 4 and Harassment.  The total potential jail sentence if he were to be convicted would be 1 Year and 179 days of jail (364 days for Assault and 180 for Harassment).  At trial, here is what Mr. Lhotsky proved: The alleged victim was drunk and playing with the household dog.  In the process, the alleged victim hit herself, or was hit by the dog, with a dog toy.  This upset her so she began beating the dog and screaming.  Mr. Lhotsky’s client grabbed the dog and left with the dog.  Neighbors called the police due to the disturbance.  No one believed it was the dog toy that hit the alleged victim until Mr. Lhotsky got his opportunity to prove his case at trial.  Both charges were dismissed after Mr. Lhotsky cross examined the alleged victim.