Oh Hi #orleg! I mentioned during my testimony on HB214 last month that good attorneys were leaving criminal defense. With OPDS being broke & the new proposed budget of even less $ for public defense - get ready for even more good attorneys to leave. oregoncapitalinsider.com/news/state-pub…
Here's an article from 2018 pointing out the Sixth Amendment Center's report that Oregon's public defense system fails defendants & their lawyers.
Its 2021 & we're moving backwards. #orleg oregonlive.com/pacific-northw…
Here's the recent Oregon Court of Appeals opinion in McMullin v Amsberry - a PCR case - which #orleg should read in order to better understand why funding for experts & qualified attorneys is so important for public defense: cdm17027.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collec…
The current recommendation for funding OPDS from the Legislative Fiscal Office is a decrease in funding of 4.5% from the 2019-21 legislatively approved budget.
But while they're cutting funding, the LFO wants OPDS to restructure the whole agency. #orleg
By cutting the budget the Oregon Legislature is in essence sending the message that they do not value the attorneys across the state who work in public defense, they do not value the investigators, mitigation specialists & all the experts who provide public defense services.
This is shameful. Without qualified attorneys there will be more wrongful convictions, more cases reversed on PCR. Without qualified attorneys it will ultimately cost the state more money for longer prison sentences because there will be less workup & mitigation done on cases.
Here's the proposed public defense budget for 2021-23 from the Legislative Fiscal Office so you can see the decrease in funding is suggested in the very first paragraph: olis.leg.state.or.us/liz/2021R1/Dow…
Not a single member of the Oregon Legislature can say they are working for criminal justice reform if this decrease is the funding for public defense they support. Until public defense is funded the same as prosecutors offices - the system is not going to change.
My reps are @michaeldembrow & @KhanhPhamForOR & I would ask them to reject this proposed decrease in funding for Oregon public defense. Oregon needs to fund public defense like it matters - because it does.
Call or email your state reps & ask them to fully fund public defense.
Oh look OPDS trying to tell attys & public defense providers the 4.5% budget cut is no biggie b/c they'll comply w/ #orleg requirements necessary to release withheld $100 million. Just like they've addressed the issues from the 6th Amendment Center report! oregon.gov/opds/SiteAsset…
Oh wait, OPDS *hasn't* addressed the problems outlined in the Sixth Amendment Center Report - which came out in December of 2018: opb.org/news/article/p…
Why does this matter? The budget for the Trial Criminal Division is $186,458,931 to start July 1, 2021.
OPDS ran out of $ for the month of June 2021, so attorneys, investigators, experts are not being paid for completed work, even as they continue to work & go to trial.
🧵on how Assault II in Oregon is usually charged for perspective on the recent indictment of PPB ofc Budnick of misdemeanor Assault IV.
Media might to ask DA's office for comparable cases where a baton or rod or bat or other item was used & case was indicted as BM11 Assault II:
Assault II carries a mandatory 70 month prison sentence. If DA had charged Assault II that ofc wouldn't be able to negotiate for a dismissal via a civil compromise or setover-sentencing agreement, but with a misdemeanor Assault IV charge, a dismissal is a possible outcome.
Media should ask DAs office for comparable Assault II cases where events captured on video but no visible injuries, no hospital records but case still indicted as BM11. Media should ask DAs office for comparable Assault II cases that *weren't* captured on video & still indicted.
Oregon Ways & Means voted to decrease funding for public defense by 4.5% today.
In 2018 the Sixth Amendment Center Report said Oregon's public defense system fails defendants & their lawyers. If #orleg wants criminal justice reform then it needs to properly fund public defense.
Oregon was the last state in the country to require unanimous jury verdicts in felony cases.
And the only reason we now have unanimous jury verdicts in Oregon is because of a United States Supreme Court case - Ramos v Louisiana - and not because of the Oregon Legislature.
It has not been a priority for #orleg to ensure that citizens facing the criminal justice system receive due process. Because if it were a priority, the legislature would have voted to change the law & require unanimous juries.
Funding public defense isn't a priority either.
Looking at photos from a trip to NYC in 2019. Love the Central Park bench memorials & this was a favorite:
In Loving & Eternal Memory
Norma Juliet Wikler
Outraged and Outrageous Kentucky 1940 - Costa Rica 2002
Looked up Norma Wikler & turns out she was exactly the kind of person I'd liked to have met.
"she was well known for her brilliant wit & sense of humor, her astounding energy, intellectual breadth, dramatic flair, & her often-zany sense of the absurd." senate.universityofcalifornia.edu/_files/inmemor…
Here's a published version of a speech she gave (in 1989) on gender bias in the court system: nawj.org/uploads/pdf/co…
This was a fun quiz & not a surprise I got Musical. BRB going to make a playlist w/ some songs I haven't listened to recently - like The Pointer Sisters - who will forever be associated w/ both Beverly Hills Cop & sneaking into clubs to dance in HS: buzzfeed.com/evelinamedina/…
So much fun:
Love the silliness of music video's from the 80's:
So apparently the Oregon legislature #orleg is seeking to eliminate the 180-Day Pretrial Detention Cutoff for people who have been arrested & held in jail & waiting for trial during COVID-19.
This is a bad idea, for the following reasons:
1) It’s contrary to the most recent OR Supreme Court Chief Justice Order, directing courts to “explore alternatives to current arrest and detention policies…to keep jail populations at a minimum” in the interest of public safety during the pandemic. courts.oregon.gov/rules/ORAP/CJO…
2)It’s contrary to speedy trial right under Article 1, sec 10, OR Constitution, the prohibition against treating confined persons w/ unnecessary rigor under Article 1, sec 13 of OR Constitution, & the right to a speedy & public trial under the Sixth Amendment to U.S. Constitution