Who is this Oregon lawyer? David T. Viuhkola This Oregon lawyer refuses to
communicate with
me.
Who is this Oregon lawyer?_Organization: 6751 SE Thiessen Rd Suite B
Who is this Oregon lawyer?_StreetAddress: Milwaulkie, Oregon 97267
Who is this Oregon lawyer?_Address2: (503)654-2845
Who is this Oregon lawyer?_City:
FAX (503)654-7436
steve turner re:case No.07-1066
Contact_WorkPhone:
(503)995-7748
facts:
1. Lawyer failed to renew the motion to suppress after state during cross
examination of
defenses expert accident reconstructions stated don't you think it would
important so
view the bottom side of the vehicles so you could see if the Toyota made the
gouge marks
as you claim, which he responded yes ,well why didn't you, he replied because
the evidence
was let go by the sta†e and they didn't even take one picture of the bottom side
of
either vehicle which is very important when trying to determine what
happened and who
is at fault in an accident like this
2.Attorney stipulated to results of toxicology test's that a proper chain of
custody was
not maintained on.
3.Refused to qualify accident reconstructions' as they did in aristine
wilson v joseph
d woods,meyers bakeries inc.and mcc transportation company inc.,if this would
have been
applied the states accident reconstructionist's would have been disqualified
from
testifying as experts period
4. Failed to declare an error in the sentence due to the fact in the judges own
findings
of facts he finds shelley not guilty of a duii but guilty of manslaughter in the
second
degree based on recklessness because she was coming down under the influence)
from
bingeing on methamphetamines days prior.
5.Failed to even mention a letter that shelly wrote to the da a month after the
accident
telling the da the method and manner of questioning she had been subjected
to by deputy
junker at the hospital.
6.Failed to object when the da purposely read the death certificate wrong twice
,to
mislead the court buy saying the cause of death was blunt force trauma to
the head not
the side of the head which would not be a typical injury in a head-on as they
would try
to convince the courts that this in fact happened.
7.Was asked numerous times to request that state produce a complete chain of
custody
report, and if the state wouldn't, then fox v olsen 1987 would be applied and
all
toxicology results would have to be dismissed as evidence..
8.From august 16th to the day of trial on 23rd day talked or communicated with
shelley no
more than 5 times to prepare her case and let her no what was going on and what
they were
going to do at trial.