Doré Law Firm

Category: Practice Areas

  • Big Felony Win – Client Found Not Guilty of Two Counts of Criminal Impersonation of a Peace Officer

    Client was charged with two felony counts of criminal impersonation of a peace officer in Multnomah County. The charges stemmed from allegations that the client performed services as a security guard while wearing a law enforcement badge.

    The charge of criminal impersonation of a peace officer requires proof of three things:

    1. An intent to defraud or gain a benefit;

    2. the use of false law enforcement identification to give an impression that the person is a peace officer; and

    3. does an official act in the assumed character.

    Three police officers, an OLCC (which is charged with enforcing Oregon liquor control rules) inspector and an DPSST (which is charged with licensing private security guards) investigator testified that Client performed work in the role of security guard while wearing a law enforcement badge and allowing people the false impression that he was a law enforcement officer.

    Client testified that he thought people were under the impression that he was a law enforcement officer, and that it was a mistake to not correct that false impression, but that he never intended to trick anyone into thinking he was law enforcement. He also testified he wore an old badge from when he was in law enforcement because he didn’t know it would create such problems when he was working security.

    After two days of testimony by prosecution witnesses, and following Client’s testimony, the judge in the case granted the defense motion for acquittal and dismissed all charges. The jury, hearing the judges decision, congratulated Client – and some even came out of the jury box to shake his hand!

    A big win for a Client that was truly not guilty!

  • Back to School Means Back to Stopping for the School Bus

    With most students heading back to school next week, we’ll once again be sharing the roads with school buses helping to get them there. Remember to observe the following laws when school buses are stopped with lights flashing- besides the obvious safety risks, in Oregon you can get a ticket even if a police officer doesn’t observe the violation and in Washington, you can expect your fine to be double the normal amount.

    • Prepare to stop when you see a school bus with flashing amber lights
    • When red lights are flashing, traffic in all directions is required to stop before reaching the bus
    • Remain stopped until the lights are no longer flashing
    • This law applies to traffic going all directions on any roadway with 2 or more lanes of traffic
    • In Oregon the only exception is if you are on a divided highway with 2 roads separated by a median or barrier. (a painted dividing line or road with a center turn lane does not count)
    • In Washington, it is permitted to pass a stopped bus as long as the road is at least 3 lanes and you are going the opposite direction

    Remember, if you get one of these tickets, don’t discuss it with your citing officer and call Dore Law Firm to see if we can keep this ticket off your driving record.

  • Oregon Civil Compromise of a Misdemeanor or Felony

    Settling Your Case the Civil Way

    There are lots of ways for a criminal case to end – a glory-filled not guilty verdict by a jury, a hard-won plea bargain or the civil way – through a civil compromise.

    Oregon law allows people to resolve most misdemeanor and class C felonies* through a process called a civil compromise. So long as the victim agrees in writing that he or she has received “satisfaction for the injury,” the court can dismiss the case and it can never be brought again.

    Satisfaction for the Injury Can Mean Anything in a Civil Compromise

    The victim of the crime can agree that nearly anything is satisfaction for the injury. I’ve represented clients in cases where the victim simply wanted an apology; others wanted their damaged property repaired; some want money for their lost time and lost sense of security. It truly can be anything – so long as the victim feels compensated.

    A Successful Civil Compromise Leads to Dismissal Forever

    Once a judge has dismissed a case under the civil compromise statute it is gone forever. The prosecution can’t charge you again for the same crime even if the victim changes his or her mind and wants to go back to a criminal prosecution. You’re done.

    You’ll Want Help to Complete a Civil Compromise

    Defendants shouldn’t attempt a civil compromise on their own. Often, courts enter an order that prohibits the defendant from contacting the victim. You could wind up in jail if you call the victim up to try to settle the case.

    Its helpful to have your attorney act as a middleman to settle the case. Discussions can get heated when a defendant and victim talk directly – and that’s not good for your chances at settling the case.

    My approach is simple: I explain my client’s situation to the victim, what they stand to lose if convicted and try to find out what can help the victim feel satisfied for his or her loss. Once the victim is on board, I draft a civil compromise agreement and submit it to the court with a motion to dismiss the case forever.

    A Good History of Successful Civil Compromises

    I’ve successfully entered civil compromise agreements on charges for theft (including felony theft), misdemeanor and felony hit and run , assault, and property damage. Give me a call to talk about your case. We’ll see if we can settle it the civil way.

     

    *Civil comprise is prohibited in those cases that are: committed by or upon a peace officer; riotously; with the intent to commit a crime punishable only as a felony (like a Class A or B felony); Domestic Violence crimes if it was Assault 4, Assault 3, Menacing, Recklessly Endangering Another Person, Harassment, Strangulation; reckless driving; any other victim-less crime.

  • A Good Day in Vancouver, WA Traffic Court

    Today was a great day in Vancouver, WA traffic court. Washington law is very protective of driver’s righs. Specifically IRLJ 6.6, one of the court rules, requires all speed measuring devices be certified to be accurate and that the State must prove that calibration in trial. Using the great protections afforded Washington drivers, my clients and I had a great day today in Vancouver, WA traffic court.

    • Speeding 95 in a 60 mph zone and no proof of insurance tickets dismissed for an unlawful stop by an unmarked police vehicle. (City and county police vehicles must be marked under RCW 46.08.065)
    • Speeding 64 in a 35 mph zone dismissed because the State failed to prove the radar unit was calibrated.
    • Negligent Driving 2 (alleging defendant drove in a negligent manner that endangered people or property) based on driving 98 in a 60 not guilty because State failed to prove laser calibrated correctly and officer didn’t testify that defendant did anything dangerous.
    • Speeding 68 in a 50 dismissed because Trooper used wrong tuning fork to calibrate his radar unit.

    Good things can happen if you have a good attorney working on your case. Give me a call if you have a Vancouver, WA or Clark County Traffic Court Ticket and we’ll see what I can do to help you keep it off your record.

  • Oregon’s Pedestrian Law and Failing to Remain Stopped for a Pedestrian

    Oregon’s pedestrian law (and the violation of failing to stop and remain stopped for a pedestrian under ORS  811.028) at first glance seems pretty simple: stop for pedestrians in cross walks. From there, it gets a little more complex.

    When must you stop under Oregon’s pedestrian law?

    You must stop for a pedestrian if the ped is crossing with a signal (Green light or walk sign) or in a crosswalk and

    In your lane.

    In the next lane (regardless of whether the ped is approaching or already past you. You must wait for them to clear the adjacent lane.)

    In a lane you’re turning into plus
    Six feet into the adjacent lane if the pedestrian is facing a signal or
    The nextlane if the pedestrian doesn’t have a signal.

    Unless the ped is crossing where there is a safety island and the ped is on the far side of it or there is a nearby pedestrian tunnel or bridge.

    In those cases you don’t have to stop.

    What is a crosswalk under Oregon’s pedestrian law?

    Easy. Every corner is a crosswalk, regardless of whether it is marked. Marked crosswalks are crosswalks no matter where they are.

    When do you have to stop at the crosswalk under Oregon’s pedestrian law?

    You must stop if any part of the pedestrian (including part of a crutch, cane, wheelchair, or bicycle) enters the crosswalk with the intent to cross.

    Should you stop if someone is standing on the sidewalk looking they want to cross? Yes!

    Should you get a ticket for failing to stop and remain stopped for that pedestrian under ORS 811.028? No!

    Give me a call if you feel you’ve been unjustly accused of failing to stop and remain stopped for that pedestrian under ORS 811.028 or simply need to keep a clean driving record. Of love to chat with you about your case and see how I can help out.

    One last thing: stop for pedestrians. You’re in a giant machine and they could get seriously injured or killed if you don’t atop. Even if you appear to have the right to not stop under this law, it could expose you to prosecution under other laws or you could face a very expensive lawsuits. Definitely not worth the 30 seconds you save for not stopping.

  • Washington County Felony DUI Reduced to Misdemeanor

    Great result today out of Washington County, Oregon where my client’s felony DUI charge was reduced to a misdemeanor DUI.

    Felony DUI in Oregon is based on the number of prior convictions. ORS 813.011 leads to a felony DUI if you have two prior convictions in the last ten years. It carries a minimum of 90 days in jail without the possibility of work release or home confinement.

    Motion to Challenge Prior Convictions Successful

    Defendant had a prior case in California that was remarkably similar to an Oregon diversion. We made a motion to challenge defendant’s prior convictions based on whether the Oregon legislature intended a prior “conviction” to mean a guilty plea or the entry of a judgment of conviction.

    The court ruled that the State had failed to prove the California case ended in a conviction. This change the case from a felony DUI to a Misdemeanor DUI. Defendant ended the case with a sentence that was 1/3 of the DA’s final pre-trial offer, less than the mandatory minimums for a felony DUI and he’s eligible for work release and home confinement. Overall, a great result!

  • SE Foster and SE 52nd Now a School Zone

    Look out SE Portland drivers! SE Foster and SE 52nd is now a school zone.


    View Larger Map

    That means drivers must drive 20 through that area when “children are present.”

    ORS 811.124: “Children are present” means that children are in the crosswalk, waiting on the curb at the crosswalk or a traffic patrol member is present.

    This is a big change for this section of road. Keep an eye out for those kiddos and hit the brakes or you’re risking getting a big, fat ticket!

  • Washington DOL Hearing Victory

    I recently represented a client in a Washington DOL Hearing (Department of Licensing) regarding whether his license could be suspended for allegedly failing a breath test.

    Following a car accident, my client was contacted by police. My client admitted drinking earlier in the evening but had stopped long ago. The officer did not smell any alcohol on my client but said that his eyes were droopy, red and watery. She arrested him for DUI.

    Upon arriving at the station, the officer prepared to do a breath test: she checked his mouth for any foreign objects; she waited the 15 minute waiting period required as part of the Washington State Toxicologist breath test protocol. She had my client blow into one BAC Datamaster breath test machines. It returned an “invalid sample” error. She turned to the second machine in the room and had him blow into that one. Subsequently, she charged him with DUI and asked Washington DOL to suspend his license.

    We requested a Washington DOL Hearing to challenge the validity of the license suspension. The Washington DOL Hearing Officer threw out the suspension because the officer failed to follow the court protocol.

    WAC 448-16-040 requires:“(4) In the event that the instrument records an “invalid sample” result at any point during the subject’s test, that subject’s test should be readministered, after again determining that the subject has no foreign substance in their mouth as outlined in WAC 448-16-040(1), and repeating the fifteen minute observation period.”

    The officer didn’t re-do the mouth check and didn’t repeat the fifteen minute observation period.

    The result? Client gets to continue driving without a pretrial suspension that would have resulted if we had lost his Washington DOL Hearing. Client may also be able to use the officer’s error to suppress the breath test in the criminal case as well.

    The moral? Police reports require a careful reading to catch the small errors that an officer may make. Those errors can yield big results.

  • Vancouver DUI Reduced to Negligent Driving

    Good Result on Vancouver DUI

    My client was charged with a DUI over .15% blood alcohol content. This case looked tough from the beginning, with allegations of a high BAC, allegations of an “overwhelming” odor of alcohol and a report detailing an extremely poor job on field sobriety tests. The original offer was to plead as charged and go to jail for 2 days.

    Initially, the State only turned over a written report. However, after reviewing it, it was obvious that there was also a video recording of the stop. After forcing the state to turn over the tape I discovered that 1) the first officer on the scene never smelled the odor of alcohol from my client; 2) the officers commented that she did an “amazing job” on field sobriety tests (despite writing up report to look like a terrible job); and 3) when client said she didn’t want to do field sobriety tests, officers made a veiled threat of arrest if she didn’t do them.

    The end result was a reduction from a high blow DUI to Negligent Driving 1. That means 3 years less probation, no further license suspension and avoiding a year of ignition interlock. That’s a great result for almost any Vancouver DUI!

  • Milwaukie Is (Finally) Fixing Photo Radar Problems

    Oregon Law is Clear About Warning Drivers of Photo Radar

    Oregon Law sets out the requirement for warnings signs at the borders of cities using photo radar:

    [quote align=”center” color=”#999999″]ORS 810.439(1) sets out the pertinent prerequisites to the issuance of a violation on the basis of photo radar camera: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the jurisdictions using photo radar: a citation for speeding may be issued on the basis of photo radar if the following conditions are met: …  (D) Signs indicating that speeds are enforced by photo radar are posted, so far as is practicable, on all major routes entering the jurisdiction.”[/quote]

    For years I’d been making the argument that, because Milwaukie didn’t have signs posted on 17th or on Johnson Creek, they couldn’t use photo radar:

    Old Milwaukie on 17th
    Milwaukie’s Old Setup on 17th – No Warning Signs

    [quote align=”center” color=”#999999″]

    Here, the City is in violation of ORS 810.439 because no R10-18 signs are posted on Johnson Creek at the jurisdictional boundary where that route enters the city. Johnson Creek is a major route entering the jurisdiction of Milwaukie. There are no R10-18 signs posted on Johnson Creek at the jurisdictional boundaries. This is a clear violation of ORS 810.436.

    The City may argue that placement of a signs elsewhere in the area is sufficient to meet the requirements of ORS 810.439. The City would be incorrect. ORS 810.439 requires warning signs at all points where a major route enters a jurisdiction using photo radar. The City’s compliance with ORS 810.439 is binary: it either is or is not in full compliance. Here, it is not in compliance.

    [/quote]

    The City Is Installing Proper Signs

    Milwaukie is now going through the process of installing proper signs. There are warning signs on Se McLoughin, SE 17th and, finally, on Johnson Creek. That’s a lot of the “major routes” entering town. Is it all of them? If not, this argument may still be alive and well. Contact me if you know of a “major route” entering Milwaukie that doesn’t have the proper signs.

    photo 1
    Milwaukie’s New Setup on 17th – Tiny “Traffic Laws Photo Enforced” Warning Sign in the Distance

     

     

    It’s Still Worth Fighting Milwaukie Photo Radar Tickets

    Just because milwaukie is finally getting in compliance with the Oregon legislature’s rules about photo radar doesn’t mean the tickets aren’t worth fighting. There are still plenty of issues to be raised: jurisdiction, if the speed limit being enforced is the actual speed limit and, like in recent case, the City may not prove all the elements of the violation.

    Contact me today to discuss your case. I offer a phone or in-office consultation. Let’s see what we can do to keep your ticket off your record.