• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Harmful Arrest

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

xcehorz

Junior Member
I am in Salem (Marion County) Oregon.
I was arrested but told the officers I had a wheelchair with documented need, since I wasn't in it they ignored what I said. I served 105 days with little to no medical even the pre-sentencing investigatored didn't listen or the judge. I have secondary progressive Multiple Sclerosis. I still have 2 years of probation and a violence class plus court costs. Is there anything I can do to sue or appeal this?
 


Ohiogal

Queen Bee
Why were you not in your wheelchair? What were you doing when the police arrested you? How were you harmed? Did you submit medical evidence to the court showing your documented need? Were you in a wheelchair in court?
 

snostar

Senior Member
In order to appeal you need adequate grounds, wheelchair or no wheelchair has nothing to do with providing grounds for appeal of your criminal conviction.
 

xcehorz

Junior Member
snostar said:
In order to appeal you need adequate grounds, wheelchair or no wheelchair has nothing to do with providing grounds for appeal of your criminal conviction.
What about suing?
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
xcehorz said:
What about suing?
Who do you want to sue?

If the criminal court did not think your wheelchair was worthwhile, what makes you think a new court will?

How were you damaged by not having your wheelchair? What is the dollar value of your damages?

- Carl
 

MeMaT

Junior Member
Could it be that?

I can only say that perhaps he did all he could to inform his attorney (Court Appointed?) about his specific needs, and that there was no opportunity for him to speak to the court about what his attorney may have failed to mention (for whatever oversight - and I do not mean to undermine the role of the attorney and give full benefit of the doubt). Should the defendant be expected to know when to (and whom to) say something? A person facing court (especially for the first time) is reliant upon the experts (i.e. the Judge, as well as the person's attorney) because they are lacking experience about the whole situation. Is it fair that later on, down the road, another court can say that they should have raised certain issues previously, and that no recourse shall apply?
 

CdwJava

Senior Member
MeMaT said:
Is it fair that later on, down the road, another court can say that they should have raised certain issues previously, and that no recourse shall apply?
Any recourse would have to concern damages. If he was not damaged, then no compensation is necessary to "make him whole."

Plus, even while in jail or in court, people can make a stink. If he NEEDED his wheelchair, he could have raised the issue a half dozen different ways. And if his attorney chose to deliberately ignore his requests without good cause, then he can sue his attorney (good luck with that), but I don't see where he has a good claim against anyone.

- Carl
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top