Concealed vs. open carry. Need advice!

The only advice that is going to make any difference in this case is "Consult with a criminal defense attorney.". The only case law that would apply would be Oregonian cases. Anything anyone gives you here would probably be, at best, hear-say, anecdotal cases that may or may not be true.

I would strongly recommend AGAINST trying to present your case yourself. That is the best way to be found guilty even if you are not. I forget which attorney I heard it about a long time ago, but

"A lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client."

As a non-lawyer, I know I would not want to risk my freedom, my rights and my criminal record on myself.
 
I remember reading that a pocket clip showing makes a knife not concealed in Oregon, but I don't remember the details.

I travel to Oregon frequently, so I guess I should find out, although I rarely carry an auto outside of Arizona.
 
Thank you to zzyzzogeton for getting that part out of the way. This is really going to come down to how good of lawyer you get, and you will see why when I explain it.

166.240 is the statute in question which makes it illegal to carry autos and balisongs concealed. "Concealed" is not defined in the law, and I have no Oregon-based cases to clarify it with. However, I can tell you that in other states, a visible pocket clip but otherwise concealed knife is generally viewed as "concealed" (the exception being New York City where the law is reversed). The reasoning is that your average citizen seeing the clip will not necessarily recognize that it's a knife, much less a switchblade. A police officers ability to spot and recognize it as a knife is considered "special" because, the court reasons, an officer has training on spotting threats and duty to carefully observe common ways weapons are concealed. This may or may not fly in an Oregon court so it depends if your lawyer does the research.

The second matter is the nature of the encounter with the police officer. Except for New York City, the mere presence of a pocket clip without any other suspicious activity will almost never result in an officer approaching that person. This would be especially true in Oregon where concealed normal pocket knives are legal (thus clip or no would be irrelevant). You don't have to post on this forum what you were doing or what crime you were being investigated for, but don't BS me or your lawyer by claiming you were 100% innocently minding your own business. The only other possible alternative is you were suspected of a crime by misidentification and the cop used the knife as an excuse charge because he was butthurt at getting the wrong guy (I have only seen this once in 20 years). Anyhow, it's possible depending on the nitty-gritty details of the encounter to claim the cop's investigation of your knife lacked the burden of evidence ("reasonable suspicion" or "probable cause") to do so. State v Shaw 2009 is a good reference, and while the defendant lost that case, it provides a detailed breakdown of how lawful stops work and are viewed by the courts: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A136471.htm
 
From the little that I read on Oregon it looks like autos are legal as long as they are not concealed. Step over into Washington and no springs allowed at all. Issue isn't an auto, just the concealed bit.

I tried reading thru some of that state v turner and I am not sure how it referenced the concealed part other than he was found standing over a victim with a knife in his hand. There is something else somewhere I am sure.

And I would not take a plea. The people on here saying its OK to have taken probation....no. That sticks with you. Even though its a misdemeanor it will stay with you and can have an affect on future employment and possibly current employment. Don't let some half ass lawyer who doesn't want to look into some case study talk you into a plea when it looks as though you are not guilty of anything.
 
^that's why I said find a better lawyer but that's also probably his worst case scenario,
So, he is going to be OK.

But should fight I it.
 
Doing some research on here from people living in Oregon they said that as long as the clip, sheath etc. is visible it is not concealed. The thread is from 2009 and the laws may of changed, but I AM NOT A LAWYER SO TAKE WHAT I SAY FOR WHAT IT IS AN OPINION. I will post a link to the thread, but I would fight this, No way would I take a plea when one of the big 3 knife makers is located in Oregon and it's legal to buy sell and carry autos, best of luck, get yourself a good lawyer contact kniferights.org and read this thread...http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/638390-Oregon-Knife-Laws I wouldn't worry too much about it, BUT I wouldn't lie down and not fight it either. Kniferights.org phone number 866-889-6268
 
Just a few thoughts from someone who has been through the criminal justice system-

Probation- If you are placed on probation for a weapons related crime you will be prohibited from possessing any "deadly weapons" for the duration of your probation (years), this includes all firearms and knives other than kitchen knives. If you are required to have knives for your job, exceptions will be made but do not expect your probation officer to be generous in what they consider to be acceptable. Forget about carrying a knife or having non-kitchen knives in your home. There will also likely be other restrictions on your freedom depending on what type of probation you are on. You might lose your fourth amendment rights against warrantless searches (cops will be able to search your home, vehicle, and person WITHOUT a warrant). And you might be required to ask for permission to leave your county for any reason.

Probation and court fees (which you are required to pay) can be a few thousand dollars or more. And then of course there are any fines you might receive.

Lawyers (both public defenders and "paid" lawyers)- Some are good and will do everything possible to fight for you, but some really suck and all they want is to be done with your case so they can move to the next one. Even paid lawyers, ones you have paid thousands of dollars to, might sell you out just to make their lives easier. Once your check clears, you're just a bother to them and they want to be rid of you as quickly as possible.

A bad lawyer will take advantage of the fact that you are ignorant of the law and how the system works. They will tell you what THEY want you to know. They will advise you to do what THEY want you to do. They will pressure you to take the first deal that the prosecutor offers because that will end the case quickly (less work for them). Their goal will not be to get the best possible result for you, but instead to make THEIR life easier by putting the least amount of time and work into your case.

From everything I've seen, it's almost impossible to replace a public defender with a different public defender. If you want to replace a PD you have to hire your own lawyer.

Plea Bargains- One of the first things I learned after going through the criminal justice system is that you NEVER take the first deal that is offered by the prosecutor. Your lawyer (if they are a bad one) will want you to take the deal and might say anything, even lie to you, in order to convince you to take the deal. But among experienced offenders/inmates/criminals, the first deal offered is called "the IDIOT DEAL", as in, only an idiot would take it. And that is often what the prosecutor is hoping for, that the defendant will be dumb enough to take the deal. The reality is that a prosecutor will often offer an "idiot deal" despite knowing all along that they don't have a case. And in many cases, when a defendant refuses the "idiot deal", the prosecutor will drop the charges entirely because they don't have a case to take to trial. There is a lot of trickery and dishonesty involved in the criminal justice system. Just as your own lawyer might lie to you in order to convince you to take a crappy deal, a prosecutor might try to get you to plead guilty even if they know that they have no case. Sad but true.

The general rule among experienced criminals is, refuse the first deal and DEMAND a trial. What this does is, it forces your lawyer to fight for a better deal, or fight to have the charges dropped, because your lawyer doesn't want to go through all the time and work of a trial (unless you're paying them by the hour). If the charges are dropped, great. If they aren't dropped, what usually happens is, right before the trial starts the prosecutor will offer the "sweetheart deal". The "sweetheart deal" is the very best deal that the defendant is likely going to get and it will be far better than the "idiot deal" that was initially offered. The prosecutor offers the "sweetheart deal" in order to avoid going through with the trial, or because they know that their case is weak.

If I were in your shoes, and if I could afford it, I would seek out a private attorney. But whether I hired my own attorney or stayed with a PD, I would refuse the first deal and DEMAND a trial. But that's me, and it's something I learned the hard way as both a defendant and a convicted felon.

As for your case, I'm curious to know the circumstances of your arrest. Specifically, if you were stopped by a cop solely because he saw the pocket clip of your knife, then I can't help but wonder how he could say the knife was "concealed"? How can they call a knife "concealed" if it was visible? But I guess that's a matter to be resolved in court.

Good luck to you.
 
Last edited:
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

killgar said:
Just a few thoughts from someone who has been through the criminal justice system-

Probation- If you are placed on probation for a weapons related crime you will be prohibited from possessing any "deadly weapons" for the duration of your probation (years), this includes all firearms and knives other than kitchen knives. If you are required to have knives for your job, exceptions will be made but do not expect your probation officer to be generous in what they consider to be acceptable. Forget about carrying a knife or having non-kitchen knives in your home. There will also likely be other restrictions on your freedom depending on what type of probation you are on. You might lose your fourth amendment rights against warrantless searches (cops will be able to search your home, vehicle, and person WITHOUT a warrant). And you might be required to ask for permission to leave your county for any reason.

Probation and court fees (which you are required to pay) can be a few thousand dollars or more. And then of course there are any fines you might receive.

Lawyers (both public defenders and "paid" lawyers)- Some are good and will do everything possible to fight for you, but some really suck and all they want is to be done with your case so they can move to the next one. Even paid lawyers, ones you have paid thousands of dollars to, might sell you out just to make their lives easier. Once your check clears, you're just a bother to them and they want to be rid of you as quickly as possible.

A bad lawyer will take advantage of the fact that you are ignorant of the law and how the system works. They will tell you what THEY want you to know. They will advise you to do what THEY want you to do. They will pressure you to take the first deal that the prosecutor offers because that will end the case quickly (less work for them). Their goal will not be to get the best possible result for you, but instead to make THEIR life easier by putting the least amount of time and work into your case.

From everything I've seen, it's almost impossible to replace a public defender with a different public defender. If you want to replace a PD you have to hire your own lawyer.

Plea Bargains- One of the first things I learned after going through the criminal justice system is that you NEVER take the first deal that is offered by the prosecutor. Your lawyer (if they are a bad one) will want you to take the deal and might say anything, even lie to you, in order to convince you to take the deal. But among experienced offenders/inmates/criminals, the first deal offered is called "the IDIOT DEAL", as in, only an idiot would take it. And that is often what the prosecutor is hoping for, that the defendant will be dumb enough to take the deal. The reality is that a prosecutor will often offer an "idiot deal" despite knowing all along that they don't have a case. And in many cases, when a defendant refuses the "idiot deal", the prosecutor will drop the charges entirely because they don't have a case to take to trial. There is a lot of trickery and dishonesty involved in the criminal justice system. Just as your own lawyer might lie to you in order to convince you to take a crappy deal, a prosecutor might try to get you to plead guilty even if they know that they have no case. Sad but true.

The general rule among experienced criminals is, refuse the first deal and DEMAND a trial. What this does is, it forces your lawyer to fight for a better deal, or fight to have the charges dropped, because your lawyer doesn't want to go through all the time and work of a trial (unless you're paying them by the hour). If the charges are dropped, great. If they aren't dropped, what usually happens is, right before the trial starts the prosecutor will offer the "sweetheart deal". The "sweetheart deal" is the very best deal that the defendant is likely going to get and it will be far better than the "idiot deal" that was initially offered. The prosecutor offers the "sweetheart deal" in order to avoid going through with the trial, or because they know that their case is weak.

If I were in your shoes, and if I could afford it, I would seek out a private attorney. But whether I hired my own attorney or stayed with a PD, I would refuse the first deal and DEMAND a trial. But that's me, and it's something I learned the hard way as both a defendant and a convicted felon.

As for your case, I'm curious to know the circumstances of your arrest. Specifically, if you were stopped by a cop solely because he saw the pocket clip of your knife, then I can't help but wonder how he could say the knife was "concealed"? How can they call a knife "concealed" if it was visible? But I guess that's a matter to be resolved in court.

Good luck to you.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top