As an Oregon DUI lawyer, I end up handling a lot of traffic violation matters in addition to driving under the influence cases. For that reason, a recent Multnomah County Circuit Court case caught my attention. The case is non-binding, meaning it has no presidential effect. Nevertheless, it is interesting and instructive.
The case arose when a man driving in Portland made a last minute turn and hit a bicyclist. The driver was cited for failing to yield to a rider in a bicycle lane. At the time of the collision, the bicycle was in the intersection. Although there is a painted bike lane on both sides of the intersection, the pain does not extend through the intersection itself. For that reason, the traffic violation was dismissed.
The case would likely not have been dismissed had the driver been cited for a different violation. This result points to an essential truth about criminal defense. Just because someone did something wrong, it doesn't mean they are guilty of the crime with which they are charged. In this case, hitting a bicyclist was likely the result of a violation - but the not violation charged.
This truth is not only important in traffic violations. Criminal laws are written with specific elements. In order to prove someone's guilt, the government must show that the person committed each of those specific elements. When the government charges a crime when it cannot prove each of the elements, the accused should be acquitted. This is as true in a serious crime as it is in a mere traffic violation.
