Quote:
|
Originally Posted by feederfred
I am no attorney, but after reading this transcript, it seems kind of obvious what happened. (and the spouse agree's). It seems to me that there was a bit of confusion between the judge and the DA and your attorney as to exactly WHAT he was pleading to. The judge OK'd the 3rd degree pleas, DA objected to it, and your so called "lawyer" (who seems like he got his degree from the back of the National Enquirer) agreed to everything, without knowing WHAT he was agreeing to. I would SUE this clown for everything, file complaints with the State Bar and just generally make his life miserable.
|
Feeder that is one thing I have learned as messed up as California is at least there is accountability there. People will not do things that they can get away with elsewhere because they WILL be held accountable. And as far as the National Enquirer hey I was once in it :lol: :lol: I used to joke with my fellow thespians that once you made the Enquirer you had it made! I did not make it by that but rather by grabbing some big guys shot gun and telling him he was done shooting for the day. Some one in the neighborhood sent the pictures in from the local newspaper. I bet Mike Henderson and those people are glad I moved! But at least what is occurring there in their ignorance is not so brutal and cruel as it was.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by feederfred
You sure have the basis for an appeal. Don't talk to the DA. You will change nothing. You need to get a REAL lawyer. This will not go away. I know I said it before, but good competent legal help DOES NOT hang around a truck stop and solicit business. My attorney gets $200.00 an hour, but if it's MY BUTT that's in trouble, I'll worry about paying his bill later. I want ME protected now. Appeal as soon as possible. This is one of the worst "shaft jobs" I've ever seen a court do to a driver. You need to seek out a decent lawyer who will maybe hear your story and go the pro-bono route. Tell your story to ANY news media you can find. Keep us informed...And all the best to you. (and I will NEVER go to Medford-ANYMORE)
|
I agree as far as having a basis for an appeal but find attorney that will even touch this is a different story we have already gone beyond the 30 day appeal deadline and will have to file for a Delayed appeal which is not approving to be easy in the format as I am having difficulty in finding exactly what the court wants. Am I allowed to summit any Exhibits or any thing other than what is in the original hearing? Do they want or will they allow Statutes....Case Law? The darn attorneys I have spoken with this is out of their range. They are completely clueless :shock: And that is also the attorneys that charge $200.00 an hour!
I have to get this thing in by the 90 days! It is past the 30 days. If I mess up on the format or some technicality I will have to press for a review then to Supreme Court of Oregon appeal then if they don't listen 9th Circuit court. Due Process was definitely denied. Here are a few things that I have found so far.
United States Court of Appeals (For the Eight Circuit)
B A plea of guilty is constitutionally valid only if it is made voluntarily and intelligently. Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S> 614, 618 (1988) (citing Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 748 (1979)). A plea is not made intelligently where the defendant is not given notice of the true nature of the charge to which he is pleading. Id. Likewise, Rule 11 ©(1) requires the district court to inform the defendant of , and determine that he understands, “the nature of the charge to which the plea is offered,” among other things. REIF NOTES
Further, it is of no significance that the court did not engage in a colloquy with defendant to ensure that his acceptance of the plea, including the stipulation, was intelligent, knowing, and voluntary. Such a colloquy would have been required if defendant had pleaded guilty. ORS 135.385.
Washington State Case
involuntary guilty plea is the type of constitutional error that a defendant may raise for the first time on appeal. State v. Walsh, 143 Wn.2d 1, 6, 17 P.3d 591 (2001).
"The State bears the burden of proving the validity of a guilty plea," including the defendant's "[k]nowledge of the direct consequences" of the plea, which the State may prove from the record or by "clear and convincing extrinsic evidence." State v. Ross, 129 Wn.2d 279,
287, 916 P.2d 405 (1996). A defendant, in contrast, bears the burden of proving "manifest injustice," defined as "an injustice that is obvious, directly observable, overt, not obscure." State
v. Saas, 118 Wn.2d 37, 42, 820 P.2d 505 (1991) (quoting State v. Taylor, 83 Wn.2d 594, 596,
521 P.2d 699 (1974)).
Due process requires that a defendant's guilty plea be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 242, 89 S. Ct. 1709, 23 L. Ed. 2d 274 (1969);
And I don't like you right now!!! You told us not to plea to anything!!!! Darn you were right now look at the mess we are in
ops: :roll: :shock:
But who would have suspected the courts could have messed up so badly!
GFIW
He was going for my lab-rottwiler that was messing with him and got me instead. And even more embarrassing is when the thing got infected and I had to go to the doctors....how humiliating. I was the butt of jokes to speak around my family! I always called him in and he was not out at night, that night tired and emotionally exhausted I did not stay up and call him in. The coyotes got him. My dogs found his leg the next day :sad: 
