Sorry flyingron not sure where you get your info from but it is not as cut and dry as " you fugitive, you no rights" there are hundreds of case law stating that if a state fails to answer a motion for speedy trial while the defendant is incarcerated elsewhere, they are violating his 6th amendment rights. just because he is a fugitive from justice does not mean he has no rights. The defendant has a right to force the acting state to place a detainer, if they fail to do so than he is within his rights to file a motion to dismiss. now there has been lots of conflict over a states argument that they did not have the resources to extradite but when you put that together with 20 years of not having the resources it becomes something else. State vs Rohlfing 155 ore app 127, 136 (1998) the court blatantly said that just placing a warrant was not enough given that the state knew of his whereabouts for 8 years, "the state failed to take even the most basic steps in bringing this to trial. " state vs Bigelow 197 or app 441 (2005) state vs forsyth 220 ore app 476 (2008)
just to name a few.... I think with a decent attorney you are in a pretty good position. Good luck
Flyingron I think your missing the point. Oregon has to show a "good" reason for not bringing me to justice and I think after 20 years of not acting on this I dont see how they can show good reason. Obviously Arizona cant try me but this is why they have extradition and interstate compacts and detainers.
I am trying to get solid legal advice on how to proceed not opinions so unless you have something to add that helps........
You stated that you wanted to own up to your crime and accept your punishment. Now you are trying weasel out of it. You already have a lawyer for answers so I'm not sure what else we can tell you.
What makes you think they need a "good reason". Sorry we can't rewrite the contsitution and 200 years of jurisprudence to accomodate your personal desires.
You also do NOT get to dictate to the other volunteers on the board as to what they can and can not say. If you want to be able to tell people to shut up, go get paid counsel.
When you say that Oregon was informed of your various incarcerations, are you speaking of the single time you sent a motion? Did you properly serve that motion on the prosecutor and file it for hearing, or did you simply send it to the court and assume that it would somehow be noticed to the prosecutor? If the latter, it's quite possible that nobody even looked at it once it was placed in the file by the clerk. Is it your contention that the motion you filed complied with Oregon's codification of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD)?
You have no right to be extradited. You have the right to oppose extradition and can waive that right in the event that extradition proceedings are commenced.
State v Rohlfing does not appear to be particularly helpful to you, as it's clear that you knew through most or all of your absence from Oregon that you were under indictment, and you chose not to return to face those charges ("Although defendant had moved before that arrest attempt, and ultimately moved out of state, there is no evidence that he was aware that he had been indicted or that he moved or left the state to avoid arrest.") Your case is more like State v Garcia, in which the State's choice not to extradite was contrasted with the Defendant's failure to return to face the charges such that the court declared, "The reason for delay factor is neutral in this case", with charges allowed to proceed based upon the defendant's inability to demonstrate prejudice.
We have no way of knowing what you are talking about when you dribble new facts or claims into the discussion without context. What do you mean by, "why was I released to juvenile? was that considered an extradition even though it was just in another county".
Thanks for the reply. The various times that I'm speaking of are; (1) When I was arrested in Arizona. (2) when I filed the motion. (and how it was filed I cant remember but OR has put it in my file that I filed so somebody seen it) (3) when I was released from Arizona. (4) Arrested for driving on a suspended in TN in 1999. (5) Arrested for criminal trespass in TN 2002. (6) applied for a passport in 2004 and was told I had a warrant and that they had spoke with them and they would not pursue. (7)in 2004 Went to visit a friend in jail for DUI and I was detained for 3 hours while they contacted OR and OR did not want to extradite. (8) 2007 pulled over for speeding and was detained on the side of the road until dispatch spoke with OR and then let go.
As far as fleeing, I was booked into clackamas county jail in OR on Jan. 19th 1991. after spending 5 days in jail they released me to juvenile because I was wanted for running away a year earlier. At the time of my release I still had not seen a judge or anything they simply let me go to juvi. I spent one day at juvi and was released because I was 18. Right after that was when I went to Arizona. Although in the back of my head I thaught there might still be charges, I had no idea until I was booked into Arizona that they had indicted on march 5.
what makes me think they need a good reason is the fact that when someone files for a dismissal based on speedy trial issues, one of the obligations of the court is to identify if the delay is caused by the state or the defendent and to decide based on case law if there was "good reason" for the delay!! When cases have been thrown out because the state did not have "good reason" surely you have seen this before??