Huntington Juvenile Law Lawyer, Oregon


W. Michael Stephenson

General Practice
Status:  Suspended           Licensed:  9 Years

Carol Dehaven Skerjanec

Lawsuit & Dispute, Immigration, Government, Estate
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  30 Years

Robert David Butler

Real Estate, Industry Specialties, Wills & Probate, Estate
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  57 Years

Dustin A Martinsen

Traffic, Wills & Probate, Divorce & Family Law, Bankruptcy & Debt
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  10 Years

Michael Robert Mahony

Traffic, Lawsuit & Dispute, Estate, Divorce & Family Law, Criminal
Status:  In Good Standing           Licensed:  33 Years

Lise Yervasi

General Practice
Status:  Inactive           Licensed:  31 Years

Ryan Holden

General Practice
Status:  In Good Standing           

Ryan Hoopes Holden

General Practice
Status:  In Good Standing           

Krischele Whitnah

Divorce & Family Law, Elder Law
Status:  In Good Standing           

J David Coughlin

Real Estate, Divorce & Family Law, Criminal, Business
Status:  Inactive           Licensed:  54 Years

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-620-0900

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-620-0900

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.


Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Member Representative

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

TIPS

Easily find Huntington Juvenile Law Lawyers and Huntington Juvenile Law Firms. For more attorneys, search all Criminal areas including DUI-DWI, Expungement, Felony, Misdemeanor, RICO Act, White Collar Crime and Traffic attorneys.

LEGAL TERMS

CONVICTION

A finding by a judge or jury that the defendant is guilty of a crime.

INDECENT EXPOSURE

Revealing one's genitals under circumstances likely to offend others. Exposure is indecent under the law whenever a reasonable person would or should know that ... (more...)
Revealing one's genitals under circumstances likely to offend others. Exposure is indecent under the law whenever a reasonable person would or should know that his act may be seen by others--for example, in a public place or through an open window--and that it is likely to cause affront or alarm. Indecent exposure is considered a misdemeanor in most states.

SPECIFIC INTENT

An intent to produce the precise consequences of the crime, including the intent to do the physical act that causes the consequences. For example, the crime of ... (more...)
An intent to produce the precise consequences of the crime, including the intent to do the physical act that causes the consequences. For example, the crime of larceny is the taking of the personal property of another with the intent to permanently deprive the other person of the property. A person is not guilty of larceny just because he took someone else's property; it must be proven that he took it with the purpose of keeping it permanently.

EAVESDROPPING

Listening to conversations or observing conduct which is meant to be private, typically by using devices that amplify sound or light, such as stethoscopes or bi... (more...)
Listening to conversations or observing conduct which is meant to be private, typically by using devices that amplify sound or light, such as stethoscopes or binoculars. The term comes from the common law offense of listening to private conversations by crouching under the windows or eaves of a house. Nowadays, eavesdropping includes using electronic equipment to intercept telephone or other wire communications, or radio equipment to intercept broadcast communications. Generally, the term 'eavesdropping' is used when the activity is not legally authorized by a search warrant or court order; and the term 'surveillance' is used when the activity is permitted by law. Compare electronic surveillance.

JURY

Criminal Law Traffic TicketshomeGLOSSARY jury A group of people selected to apply the law, as stated by the judge, to the facts of a case and render a decision,... (more...)
Criminal Law Traffic TicketshomeGLOSSARY jury A group of people selected to apply the law, as stated by the judge, to the facts of a case and render a decision, called the verdict. Traditionally, an American jury was made up of 12 people who had to arrive at a unanimous decision. But today, in many states, juries in civil cases may be composed of as few as six members and non-unanimous verdicts may be permitted. (Most states still require 12-person, unanimous verdicts for criminal trials.) Tracing its history back over 1,000 years, the jury system was brought to England by William the Conqueror in 1066. The philosophy behind the jury system is that--especially in a criminal case--an accused's guilt or innocence should be judged by a group of people from her community ('a jury of her peers'). Recently, some courts have been experimenting with increasing the traditionally rather passive role of the jury by encouraging jurors to take notes and ask questions.

EXCLUSIONARY RULE

A rule of evidence that disallows the use of illegally obtained evidence in criminal trials. For example, the exclusionary rule would prevent a prosecutor from ... (more...)
A rule of evidence that disallows the use of illegally obtained evidence in criminal trials. For example, the exclusionary rule would prevent a prosecutor from introducing at trial evidence seized during an illegal search.

LEGISLATIVE IMMUNITY

A legal doctrine that prevents legislators from being sued for actions performed and decisions made in the course of serving in government. This doctrine does n... (more...)
A legal doctrine that prevents legislators from being sued for actions performed and decisions made in the course of serving in government. This doctrine does not protect legislators from criminal prosecution, nor does it relieve them from responsibility for actions outside the scope of their office, such as the nefarious activities of former Senator Bob Packwood.

LARCENY

Another term for theft. Although the definition of this term differs from state to state, it typically means taking property belonging to another with the inten... (more...)
Another term for theft. Although the definition of this term differs from state to state, it typically means taking property belonging to another with the intent to permanently deprive the owner of the property. If the taking is non forceful, it is larceny; if it is accompanied by force or fear directed against a person, it is robbery, a much more serious offense.

FEDERAL COURT

A branch of the United States government with power derived directly from the U.S. Constitution. Federal courts decide cases involving the U.S. Constitution, fe... (more...)
A branch of the United States government with power derived directly from the U.S. Constitution. Federal courts decide cases involving the U.S. Constitution, federal law--for example, patents, federal taxes, labor law and federal crimes, such as robbing a federally chartered bank--and cases where the parties are from different states and are involved in a dispute for $75,000 or more.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

STATE EX REL. JUVENILE DEPT. OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY v. JLM

190 P.3d 379 (2008). 345 Or. 158. STATE EX REL. JUVENILE DEPT. OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY v. JLM. No. (S056088). Supreme Court of Oregon. July 23, 2008. Petition for review denied.

STATE EX REL. JUVENILE DEPT. OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY v. FW

189 P.3d 25 (2008). 344 Or. 670. STATE EX REL. JUVENILE DEPT. OF MULTNOMAH COUNTY v. FW. No. (S055968). Supreme Court of Oregon. June 18, 2008. Petition for review denied.

Dept. of Human Services v. CZ

... SERCOMBE, J. In this juvenile dependency case, the state alleged that mother's use of marijuana presented a reasonable likelihood of harm to her two children, and the juvenile court took jurisdiction over both children as to mother on that basis. ...