Drinking and Lawyering
The Oregon State Bar opens an unusual investigation after a well-known Portland lawyer’s third DUII.
May 7th, 2008
Cover Story • Best New Band 2008 | Portland music insiders take our local scene to the chopping block—and come out with 10 new faves. 0 comments
May 7th, 2008
Holy Smoke | High times for marijuana marchers.7 comments
May 7th, 2008
Trib Translation | An annotation of last week’s news about the news.9 comments
May 7th, 2008
Murmurs • Where We Gather Each Week To See How We Live.4 comments
May 7th, 2008
Rogue of the Week • Elaine Franklin | Thy name is mud-slinging.1 comment
May 7th, 2008
Honor Thy Neighbor | But covet your own U.S. Senate candidate.0 comments
May 7th, 2008
Quick Picks for the Primary | A WW endorsements cheat sheet for your vote-by-mail ballot.2 comments
May 7th, 2008
Pop Quiz • What do you see in the picture? | WW’s weekly election feature—designed to scare the hell out of City Hall candidates.0 comments
May 7th, 2008
Getting In Gear | Can 5,000 cyclists swing a City Hall election?0 comments
May 7th, 2008
The Big Dump | A Sauvie Island resident’s fight to prevent an isle of blight.2 comments
![]() Portland lawyer Paul Petterson (above), and wife Marie Petterson (below) |
[March 26th, 2008]
A prominent Portland defense lawyer is in the uncomfortable position of defending himself in court and at the Oregon State Bar after racking up his third drunken-driving arrest.
Paul Petterson, president of Multnomah Defenders Inc., faces trial April 22 in Washington County Circuit Court after pleading not guilty to charges of driving under the influence of intoxicants and refusing to take a breath test.
Meantime, the state bar is investigating Petterson for possible violations of Oregon law and the bar’s professional conduct rules. If the bar formally prosecutes Petterson, he faces a range of sanctions, including possible suspension and disbarment.
It’s a long fall from grace for Petterson, who heads one of only six firms in Portland with a contract to provide court-appointed legal defense. A former federal public defender, Petterson took over MDI in 2000 after a stint in Washington, D.C., as indigent defense coordinator for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.
Petterson, 57, declined to comment.
A regular at the Rialto billiard club downtown, according to other lawyers who hang out there, Petterson entered court-ordered diversion programs after prior DUII arrests in 1993 and 2006. His latest legal run-in caps a bizarre tale that unfolded Oct. 9 and involves his 53-year-old wife, Marie.
According to a Beaverton police report, sometime that Tuesday morning Marie Petterson’s 1998 black Ford Explorer rear-ended another vehicle (the report doesn’t say what kind) at the intersection of Southwest Cedar Hills Boulevard and Park Way.
The woman in the other car, 48-year-old Kimberle McGaw, told police Marie Petterson had trouble walking when she got out of her car and had to brace herself to stay standing. Petterson seemed confused and didn’t recognize her own front license plate lying on the ground after it was knocked off in the crash, McGaw says.
After Petterson drove off without exchanging information, McGaw called the cops, who knocked on the Pettersons’ door about 6 pm. They got no answer, but as they drove away, a dispatcher gave them the Pettersons’ home telephone number. When the cops dialed the number and identified themselves, the woman who answered hung up.
The two officers went back to the house, but again there was no answer at the door. They were still knocking at shortly before 7 pm when a red Ford Taurus pulled up and Paul Petterson got out. As Petterson asked the police what was going on, the cops say they noticed his bloodshot eyes and an “overwhelming” smell of alcohol.
Marie Petterson opened the door to tell police to “fuck off” and tried to slam the door on them, according to the police report. As she fled upstairs, police arrested her for hit-and-run driving. She later told police she had consumed two bottles of wine that day. Her next court hearing is April 9 in Beaverton Municipal Court.
advertisement
While police arrested Petterson’s wife, a third officer arrived to deal with Petterson for suspected drunken driving. Petterson said he’d had two Widmer hefeweizens at the Rialto, but he refused to take a breath test. He was arrested and booked into Washington County Jail along with his wife.
The state bar told Petterson on Jan. 16 it’s investigating him for possible violations of two rules. The first is an Oregon Rule of Professional Conduct that forbids “committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness.” The second is a state law against “a course of conduct of such nature that, if the attorney were applying for admission to the bar, the application should be denied.”
A letter from the bar seeks information on Petterson’s past DUIIs and asks whether his drinking affects his ability to practice law. Petterson so far hasn’t cooperated with the bar probe, citing the pending court case against him.
Mark Johnson, a past president of the Oregon State Bar, says he’s never heard of a lawyer being investigated for DUII. “I have heard talk before of trying to do this, but I have never actually seen it done,” Johnson says.
The bar typically encourages lawyers who have a chemical dependency to get treatment. The rule against criminal conduct is usually reserved for felonies like theft, fraud or perjury. DUII is a misdemeanor.
In another twist: The bar complaint that prompted the investigation was submitted by Kevin Kelley, the Washington County deputy district attorney who’s prosecuting Petterson on the DUII charge.
“Pretty chickenshit” is how Portland defense lawyer Alex Hamalian describes Kelley’s decision to lodge a bar complaint before the case has made it through court. John Strait, a professor at the Seattle University School of Law, says Kelley’s role in reporting the case is troubling.
“A bar grievance is like the nuclear bomb,” Strait says. “It does suggest some ulterior motive.”
Kelley says he’s required by law to report anything that raises questions about another lawyer’s honesty or fitness.
“I had a duty,” he says. “It’s as simple as that.”
Does the law requiring Kelley to report also specify when?
If not, his timing suggests an ulterior motive which raises questions about his honesty or fitness.
@iwillbecauseiam: You might want to read the story a bit more carefully before spouting off about "the drunk lawyer who couldn't recognize his own license plate." I sure hope you are not on Mr. Petterson's jury!
If they can (rightfully) go after Bernie for his clumsy whoring around and ethical lapses, they can go after a habitually drunk lawyer.
As an old cop I used to know said: "We don't have many standards, and they aren't very high, but we *do* have some."
Nice!
I find it sooo disturbing that I am in agreement with the likes of Alex Hamallian....but,,,alas....I do think its chickenshit to go after Petterson before the criminal matter is concluded....hmmmm seem to recall a DA that backed into a building during a DUII and then theres Frink....
I would love to know who this is and have you ever slept with Hamalian? Thanks and have a great day!
Her license plate...not his. I thought "ethical lapse" when used with "attorney" or "lawyer" was an oxymoron. If the bar has to go winnowing lawyers and attorneys to separate the chaff from the nuggets, there will not be a lot of legal eagles left in Portland. Wishful thinkng. The travesty of it all is that there are a few practicing law who will take the legal pants down on the many practicing law every time. So maybe one in a hundred who has the need for legal help ever gets what he or she thought they were paying for and that was competent legal advice.
Mr. Kelley is violating Oregon Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(4) by engaging in behavior prejudicial to the administration of justice.
Even if Mr. Petterson is found guilty of DUII, that has nothing to do with his fitness as a lawyer. Mr. Kelley is clearly seeking to bolster the state's position in the DUII case by using the ethics investigation process to obtain additional evidence.
By the way, Mr. Kelley just lost a similar DUII case involving a cast member from Little People, Big World (refusal for FSTs and breathalyzer). By bringing this frivolous cases, Mr. Kelley is also possibly violating ORCP 3.1 Meritorious Claims.
I myself have beaten Mr. Kelley at trial many times and can assure everyone here he is unquestionably the dumbest practitioner in criminal law in the tri-county area.
I wonder what would happen to a cop after a third DUII arrest? Everyone would be calling for his/her badge. I find it interesting a job that requires a high school education enforces higher ethical standards than lawyers.
It is such a rare event when one lawyer files a bar complaint against the other, and the outcry from the lawyers in the previous posts clearly show they are uncomfortable with Mr. Kelly breaking with their cultural norms.
My question is this: If Mr. Petterson did nothing wrong, what does he have to worry about?
I do wonder why Mr. Petterson would refuse to take the tests, including the breath test, if he'd only had "two beers."
Maybe the DA should subpoena Mr. Petterson's bank records for the day....would be interesting to see how much he spent at the Rialto on two hefeweizens. Of course Mr. Petterson could explain away the $40.00 tab with a parade of his buddy defense attorneys who would testify Mr. Petterson bought a round for the group.
very very well put! I concur...
I don't condone DUII at all but have been 'pretext' stopped and tested when I had had nothing at all to drink. (And even after I blew .000, he still said he could smell alcohol.)
But maybe the counselor refused the tests because the cops had no probable cause to require them. It's not like they caught him weaving down the street, he was in his own driveway and had the smell of beer on his breath--which is not a crime since even if he had consumed non-alcoholic brew, he would have smelled the same.
He's a defense attorney--and it sounds like a pretty good one.









Let's see..who's in the wrong here---is it the DA who reported this fellow and tried to protect other motorists? Or is it the drunk lawyer who couldn't recognize his own license plate and his wife who told the cops to "F-- off"?