Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law 2026-11-09T10:31:32Z https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/feed/atom/ WordPress /wp-content/uploads/sites/1400580/2025/04/cropped-WVL512-32x32.png On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[How should people utilize the right to remain silent?]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47635 2026-11-08T14:52:42Z 2026-11-08T14:52:42Z Being silent isn't invoking the right to remain silent Simply refusing to speak to police officers after an arrest is not the same as asserting the right to remain silent. Police officers can continue the questioning process when the person in state custody just refuses to answer their questions. To effectively invoke the right to remain silent, a person must directly communicate the intent to use that right to lawyers. Typically, people must speak to advise police officers that they intend to remain silent and are invoking their Miranda Rights. The moment when a person invokes the right to remain silent is a good time to also invoke the right to legal representation. People in state custody who limit what information they share can reduce their chances of a future criminal conviction based on their statements while in state custody. Speaking with a criminal defense attorney as soon as possible after an arrest can help people understand and make use of the key civil rights that can help to protect them from abuses of state authority and unfair prosecution.]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[Potential benefits of banning Flock cameras in Oregon ]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47615 2026-11-09T10:31:22Z 2026-10-26T23:21:27Z Automated license plate readers, commonly called Flock cameras, have become increasingly controversial with Oregon residents in recent years. Law enforcement agencies use these devices to identify vehicles connected to criminal investigations.  Critics argue that widespread surveillance threatens privacy and creates opportunities for abuse. Thus, Oregon lawmakers may introduce legislation in 2027 to ban these cameras statewide.

In search of a more just system 

Flock cameras automatically photograph vehicles and record information such as license plate numbers, locations and travel times. This information can help investigators locate stolen vehicles or identify potential suspects. However, collecting extensive information about ordinary motorists raises important constitutional and civil liberties concerns. One potential benefit of banning these devices involves protecting personal privacy. People traveling to medical appointments, religious services, political gatherings or other lawful activities generally do not expect their movements to become part of a searchable surveillance database. Another concern involves mistaken identification. License plate recognition systems are not infallible. Incorrect readings or misleading vehicle matches can potentially result in innocent people becoming subjects of criminal investigations. Restricting this technology could also reduce opportunities for improper access to sensitive information. Concerns have emerged nationwide about surveillance data being misused for personal purposes or accessed by agencies beyond those originally intended to receive it. Oregon already strengthened regulations governing automated license plate readers in 2026. These protections include restrictions on permissible uses and limits on retaining collected information. Nevertheless, some lawmakers believe stronger measures are necessary. To this end, anyone facing criminal charges involving license plate reader evidence should understand that technological information is not automatically conclusive. An experienced Oregon criminal defense attorney can investigate questionable surveillance evidence, challenge potentially unlawful investigative practices and work to protect an accused person's constitutional rights.]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[Are bar-related assault charges that big of a deal?]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47613 2026-11-09T10:31:24Z 2026-10-18T19:06:49Z A disagreement at a bar can escalate quickly, especially when alcohol, crowded spaces and heightened emotions are involved all at once. What begins as a verbal argument might turn into pushing, punching or an altercation involving several people.  Although some individuals dismiss bar fights as relatively harmless incidents, assault charges in Oregon can result in serious consequences.

A matter of degrees

Oregon recognizes several degrees of assault, with potential penalties for conviction depending on factors such as the injuries involved, the accused person's conduct and whether a weapon was used. Fourth-degree assault is commonly associated with allegations of intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing physical injury to another person. It is generally a Class A misdemeanor, although certain circumstances can elevate the offense to a felony. A misdemeanor conviction can result in up to 364 days in jail and substantial fines. More serious allegations may be classified as third-degree or second-degree assault. These charges can arise when additional statutory factors are present, including certain serious injuries or the use of dangerous weapons. Depending on the charge, a conviction may result in significant prison time. Alcohol consumption does not automatically excuse violent conduct. Likewise, claiming that a fight was mutual does not necessarily prevent prosecution. However, self-defense may be relevant when someone reasonably believes physical force is necessary to protect themselves from unlawful force. Anyone accused of assault following a bar altercation should avoid discussing the incident publicly or contacting alleged victims in ways that could complicate the case until they’ve spoken with a skilled legal advocate.  An Oregon criminal defense attorney can evaluate the evidence, examine possible defenses and work toward minimizing potential consequences. Taking bar-related assault allegations seriously from the beginning can help to protect a defendant’s rights and future accordingly.]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[Shoplifting charges do not always involve theft]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47610 2026-10-02T19:22:18Z 2026-10-02T19:22:18Z Some people accused of shoplifting-related offenses get arrested for possessing or reselling stolen merchandise. Others might get arrested after they leave the store with unpaid merchandise. The greater the total value of the items taken from a store without paying, the more serious the charges and criminal penalties may become.  However, actually stealing from a store isn't always necessary for people to face shoplifting charges. Under state statutes and current loss prevention practices, individuals still in a retail establishment may face detention by store employees or arrest by law enforcement professionals before any type of theft actually occurs.

Some activities indicate an intent to steal

People can face shoplifting charges for behavior associated with shoplifting without getting caught in possession of stolen goods after taking them from a store. For example, if store security, retail managers or loss prevention specialists witness a customer attempting to steal by hiding items on their person or in a bag they carry, the act of attempting to conceal unpaid merchandise could be a reason for their arrest and prosecution. Similarly, any attempts to remove or deactivate the security devices that might set off door alarms  or render stolen items unusable could be justification for a shoplifting charge. Occasionally, over-eager retail and law enforcement professionals jump to conclusions about a person's behavior. They assume the worst when there may not have been any actual criminal intentions. Those accused of a shoplifting offense due to an alleged attempt to conceal merchandise or tamper with security devices may need help responding to those charges. Working with a criminal defense attorney can help those accused of shoplifting understand the reason for their charges and the best way to respond.  ]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[What to know about Oregon’s implied consent law]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47607 2026-09-17T15:59:07Z 2026-09-17T15:59:07Z Anyone in Oregon who operates a motor vehicle on a highway or upon premises open to the public is affected by the state’s implied consent law. This applies whether they hold a standard Oregon driver's license, an out-of-state license or a commercial driver's license (CDL. Here is what to know about the state’s implied consent law:

Implied consent to breath or blood test

Under ORS 813.100, a driver shall be deemed to have given consent to a chemical test of their breath or of their blood if receiving medical care in a health care facility immediately after a motor vehicle accident. The purpose of the test is to determine their blood alcohol concentration (BAC) if arrested for driving under the influence of intoxicants (DUII). 

Implied consent to urine test 

Under ORS 813.131, a person is deemed to have given consent to a chemical test of their urine for the purpose of determining the presence of an intoxicant other than alcohol in their body if arrested for DUII.  If a person’s breath or blood test shows their BAC is less than 0.08%, but officers have reasonable suspicion of impairment, a certified police officer can request a urine test.  A urine test may also be requested if a person is involved in an accident resulting in injury or property damage, regardless of whether a breath test is requested and regardless of the results of a breath test, if one is taken. 

Implied consent to field sobriety tests

If the police reasonably suspect a driver has committed the offense of DUII, they can request them to submit to field sobriety tests to determine if they are under the influence of intoxicants.  It’s crucial to understand each of these provisions of the state’s implied consent law. Learn more to identify errors that frequently occur during its administration.  ]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[The role of alcohol in sexual abuse charges]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47555 2026-11-09T10:31:27Z 2026-08-29T15:19:10Z Intoxication affects one’s ability to consent Generally speaking, coercing or forcing another person into a sexual encounter is abusive and illegal behavior. If a person cannot give clear consent, then any sexual acts they perform may not be voluntary and lawful. In cases where one party has consumed a large amount of alcohol or other mind-altering drugs, they may not have full control of their faculties and could make choices that do not align with their personal values. They may even be so inebriated they cannot effectively resist unwanted advances. Particularly in cases where one party is under the influence and the other is sober, there is a history of declined advances or another form of social imbalance in the relationship, an act of intimacy that occurs while one person is under the influence could lead to prosecution. Interactions that may have seemed consensual can lead to life-altering accusations. Assessing the state's evidence and the claims of the other party can be critical for those facing claims of sexual misconduct. A defense attorney can provide insight into the law and assist with developing a strategy for a criminal defense.]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[What must the state prove in a per se DUI case?]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47552 2026-11-09T10:31:29Z 2026-08-15T22:05:25Z Proof of elevated alcohol levels The law prohibits getting behind the wheel if the driver knows alcohol or other substances may have compromised their capabilities. It is also illegal to drive with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over the legal limit. The law makes it a crime to drive with a BAC above the legal limit, regardless of any other factors. That is the nature of a per se offense. It is an act that is a crime in its own right due to statutory standards. Most adult drivers are subject to a 0.08% BAC limit. Per se DUI cases often rely almost exclusively on chemical test results, although sometimes field sobriety test results and other evidence can also serve as evidence for the prosecution. Reviewing the circumstances of a DUI arrest with a skilled legal team can help defendants respond effectively. It is possible to fight DUI charges, including per se DUI charges, with the right strategy in many scenarios.]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[Unsafe firearm handling can trigger assault charges]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47550 2026-11-09T10:31:32Z 2026-08-03T17:44:41Z To many people, the word assault is synonymous with a physical fight or an attack on another person. They envision someone acting with the intent to harm someone else or an incident that causes injuries severe enough to necessitate immediate medical attention.  Many assault charges begin with an attempt to cause physical injury to another person. However, the state also acknowledges that people can assault one another unintentionally. Reckless and unsafe behavior can sometimes warrant assault prosecution under state statutes. In scenarios involving unintentional injuries caused by the reckless or unsafe handling of a firearm, the person who discharges the weapon could be at risk of assault charges.

Weapons can cause accidental injuries

Firearms are potentially deadly weapons. Even when people have them solely for hunting or home defense purposes, how they handle the firearm could put others at risk. Firing a weapon into the air, for example, results in the bullet falling somewhere nearby unpredictably, which can cause serious injury or worse. Whenever a person causes injury to another through the reckless discharge or handling of a firearm, the state may opt to pursue criminal charges. Fourth-degree assault charges are possible in scenarios where a person unintentionally injures someone else through behavior with a firearm that other people could recognize as negligence. The penalties could include up to 364 days in jail and fines of as much as $6,250 for misdemeanor charges.  Fighting assault charges related to an unintentional incident requires a well-prepared strategy, as the state does not necessarily need to prove intent to obtain a conviction. A criminal defense attorney can be an important form of support for those facing firearm-related assault charges.  ]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[When is an Oregon theft offense treated as a felony?]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47548 2026-09-08T13:53:02Z 2026-07-19T00:44:12Z When the property is valuable There is a financial cutoff for misdemeanor theft charges. There are two separate categories of misdemeanor theft, but any theft offense involving property worth $1,000 or more is automatically a felony regardless of any other details about the situation.

When the property has legal protection

State law recognizes that the theft of certain types of assets is a more serious crime than other, more minor thefts. Theft of a firearm, explosive, animal or precursor substance used to make drugs can be a felony, regardless of the value of the assets.

When there are aggravating factors

When a theft offense potentially exposes others to the risk of physical injury, the state may be more likely to pursue felony charges. Thefts during a riot are usually felony offenses. Theft involving extortion, burglary/unlawful entry onto private property or a robbery, possibly with a weapon, is often charged as a felony. Both misdemeanor and felony theft charges warrant an assertive response in court, but felony theft allegations are especially important for people to properly address. Reviewing the state's evidence and other details about one’s situation with a criminal defense attorney can help those accused of theft crimes develop realistic defense strategies.]]> On Behalf of Daniel J. Lounsbury Attorney at Law <![CDATA[How does the Third Party Doctrine affect evidence?]]> https://www.willamettevalleylegal.com/?p=47546 2026-07-09T07:54:57Z 2026-07-09T07:54:57Z The Third Party Doctrine can affect how the police gather evidence from a person's cellphone or mobile device. Even if officers cannot get the evidence from that device itself, they may be able to obtain it from another entity that has been voluntarily given control over that same information. For example, say that the police want to confirm that a suspect was near the crime scene when the crime took place. They believe that the location data on the suspect's phone will give them the evidence they need. However, the suspect does not give consent to unlock their phone, and the police are unable to secure a search warrant. This means that they cannot legally unlock the device itself.

Who else has that data?

However, perhaps the suspect was using an app that tracked their location. They agreed to this tracking, meaning they voluntarily turned that location data over to the company that made the app, thereby reducing the suspect's own expectation of privacy. In a situation like that, the police may be able to approach this third party and subpoena it for the information, even if they never unlocked the device. The same can be true for text messages sent through a third-party app, or for pictures and videos that have been backed up online. If you are facing serious charges, it is very important to consider what type of evidence the police are looking for and who else may control that evidence. If you have any questions about how the police gathered evidence or what legal defense options you have, an experienced attorney can help.  ]]>