EXPERT WITNESS SERVICES Page 4 of 4
I have been retained by attorneys and police departments in
California, Florida, Illinois, Idaho, Iowa, Maryland, New York,
North Carolina, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and elsewhere to
research, identify, and in some cases appraise, knives or parts
of knives both in civil cases and in criminal cases ranging from
illegal possession or concealment to receiving stolen property to
homicide. In several of these cases I have testified in court as
an expert witness on knives. These are some of the cases.
GO BACK TO PAGE 1 of Knife-Related Legal Cases
GO BACK TO PAGE 2 of Knife-Related Legal Cases
GO BACK
TO PAGE 3 of Knife-Related Legal Cases
Return to BERNARD LEVINE'S Knife-Related LINKS Page
Go to my STATE KNIFE LAWS links page
Go to BERNARD LEVINE's
BizCard page
LEGAL CASES
LISTED IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER
SAN JOSE, SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; May 1996
People vs. Cordova, Cal. PC 12020 (felony concealed dirk or dagger).
Client: Alfred S. Wright, attorney.
Cordova was stopped by police, found to have an outstanding
warrant, and then found to have in his pocket a switchblade knife.
However rather than being charged with possession of a switchblade
(Cal. PC 653k), a misdemeanor, he was charged with concealed carry
of a dirk or dagger (Cal. PC 12020), a felony. Cordova had two
prior felony convictions, so under California's "three strikes"
law, he was facing a mandatory sentence of 25 years to life for a
third felony conviction of any type. Pending trial on this charge
he was being held in jail in lieu of $5,000,000 bond.
Mr. Wright obtained photos of the knife, and sent them
to me
along with a substantial retainer check. Unfortunately for his
client (and for me), the knife at issue, in addition to being a
switchblade, was also a "dirk or dagger." Therefore I declined
to
testify, and returned the retainer check.
Early in 1996 the California Legislature had amended PC
12020
(the concealed weapons statute) by adding the following definition
of "dirk or dagger:" PC section 12020(c)(24) "a knife or other
instrument with or without a handguard that is primarily designed,
constructed, or altered to be a stabbing instrument designed to
inflict great bodily injury or death." My own more precise
definitions, as used in Levine's Guide to Knives and Their Values,
are: A) "Dagger: A knife with two or more sharp edges that is
designed primarily for stabbing." B) "Dirk: 1) A small dagger.
2) A Scottish knife intended as a sidearm." Under either
definition Cordova's knife was a dirk or small dagger.
EUGENE, LANE COUNTY, OREGON; November 13, 1996
State of Oregon vs. Ronald Bart Allen; Circuit Court 10-96-00145
Client: Michael Ford, attorney (Lombard, Honsowetz, Potter, & Budge)
[Indigent Defense Providers]
Allen, accused of murder and other crimes,
had confessed to a
strong-arm robbery in which he had held a knife to the throat of a
young woman. The principal remaining issue to be resolved by a
jury in this case, prior to sentencing, was whether the knife in
question was a "dangerous weapon," or a "deadly weapon;" the
penalty for the latter would have been substantially more severe.
In my professional opinion this is a meaningless distinction, but
under Oregon law a "deadly" knife would have been a "switchblade
knife, any dirk, dagger, ice pick... or any similar instrument..."
By this narrow definition, the defendant's knife did not
constitute a "deadly weapon," and I testified to this effect in
court. I do not know the disposition of this case.
SAINT PETERSBURG, PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA; August 1996; and
TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA; March-August 1997.
Paul Aquilino and Sherrie Aquilino vs. K Mart Corporation
Case No. 93-8174 Division "O"
Client: Eugene Brinn, attorney (Bradham & Bennett)
Representing: K Mart Corporation
On October 27, 1989, Mr. Aquilino was waiting in line to buy
lunch in a sandwich shop, when he was stabbed in the back by one
Oscar Wylie. Wylie then crossed the parking lot to the office of a
motel, placed his knife on the counter, and told the motel clerk
to call the police.
At Oscar Wylie's criminal trial, it came out that he had been
released from a Florida state prison the day prior to his attack
on Mr. Aquilino, after three years incarceration. Upon his release
his brother, Arthur Wylie, had loaned him money and driven him to
a store, allegedly a K Mart store, where Oscar Wylie had purchased
a "large" folding knife, with the intention of stabbing a white
person. Oscar Wylie voluntarily confessed to the assault upon Mr.
Aquilino, was duly convicted, and was sentenced to a lengthy
prison term. He remains incarcerated. Because Oscar Wylie had
confessed, and did not appeal his conviction, all physical
evidence in this case, including the knife, was destroyed.
In 1993 Mr. Aquilino sued K Mart Corporation, alleging that
the
firm had been negligent in its policies regarding the sale of
knives, and in its training of employees for the sale of knives.
Under Florida Statute 790.17 it is illegal to sell a knife, other
than an "ordinary pocketknife," to an individual under the age of
18, without parental consent, or to an individual of unsound mind.
Although Oscar Wylie was 20 years of age at the time of his attack
on Mr. Aquilino, he had no official ID that would have proven this.
Also, he was allegedly of unsound mind (although the Florida
Department of Corrections had found him of sufficiently sound
mind to release him the day before his attack on Mr. Aquilino).
My assignments in this case were:
- Review transcripts of depositions by material and expert witnesses.
- Define "ordinary pocketknife" as used in the industry, and as
implied in Florida Statute 790.17.
- Research the range of pocketknives on the market in October 1989,
that fit the material witnesses' descriptions.
- Provide names of experts with experience in cutlery retail sales,
and in training of cutlery sales personnel circa 1989.
- Prepare to testify at April 1997 trial regarding the possible
identity and evident ordinariness of the knife used by Oscar
Wylie, and about cutlery industry retail practices regarding sales
to minors, and sales to individuals without identification. A
mistrial was declared before I was called.
- Testify at August 1997 trial regarding some of these issues.
After a five-day trial, the jury took 20 minutes to find in
favor of defendant K Mart Corporation.
PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON; February - May, 1997
Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., v. Cooper Industries, Inc.
U.S.D.C. for Oregon, Civ. No. 96-1346-MA
Client: J. Peter Staples, attorney (Chernoff, Vilhauer, McClung
& Stenzel, LLP)
Representing: Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.
Leatherman Tool Group (LTG), manufacturer of multi-blade pliers
tools, alleged trademark and trade dress infringement by Cooper
Industries. LTG won a preliminary injunction barring the
distribution or sale of Cooper's look-alike product. I prepared a
report for my client on the wide variety of designs of this type
of tool that have been sold successfully, both past and present. I
also reviewed the briefs and transcripts leading up to the
injunction, and made a report on the strengths and weaknesses of
my client's case, with suggestions of arguments that could be
developed, and of questions that needed more detailed answers.
At trial in the autumn of 1997, the judge found in favor of
plaintiff LTG, writing a precedent-setting decision regarding the
trademark protection of trade dress. I was not called to testify.
Wall Street Journal March 11, 1997, re Leatherman v Cooper
PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON; May 17, 1999
State vs Jimmie (aka James) Carl Hall
ORS 166.270 Felon possessing restricted weapon (x2)
ORS 166.240 Felon carrying concealed weapon (x2)
Client: Julia Philbrook, attorney (Metropolitan Public Defender)
Mr. Hall was arrested for trespassing, and was found to be
carrying two knives. The arresting officer believed these to be
daggers. In Oregon it is illegal for a convicted felon to possess
a dirk, dagger, or switchblade knife, or for anyone to carry such
knives concealed. Mr. Hall's attorney retained me to examine
photos of the two knives, and I determined that neither of them
was a dagger. In a pre-trial conference I explained this to the
prosecutor, who then dropped both charges.
PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON; July 1, 1999
State vs Jerry Lee Cordery
ORS 166.270 Felon possessing restricted weapon
Client: Nancy Cozine, Attorney; Kate Marshall, Investigator (Metropolitan Public Defender)
Mr. Cordery was arrested for felon in possession of a dirk or dagger.
Ms. Marshall sent me a photo of a double-edged throwing knife, the
knife Mr. Cordery had been carrying. I determined that this knife was
indeed a dagger, in my understanding of the language of ORS 166.270.
I was not called to testify in this case.
YOUNTVILLE, NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; July 10, 2000
People vs Luis Enrique Albarez, Case #100442
Penal Code 626.10(a). Possessing a weapon on school grounds.
Client: Martin James Martinez, Esq.
The defendant was arrested for possession of a "weapon" on
school grounds. The statute reads:
626.10. Any person, except [listed officials] who brings
or possesses any dirk, dagger, knife having a blade longer
than 3-1/2 inches, folding knife with a blade that locks
into place, a razor with an unguarded blade... upon the
grounds of, or within any public school... is guilty of a
misdemeanor.
Based on photos, the knife in his possession was a locking liner type
of folding knife with a 3-1/4 inch blade. I prepared a report setting
forth, first that by its construction it was not a switchblade or
gravity knife; second that by its blade shape it was not a dirk or
dagger; and third, that from the evidence photos I could not
determine whether or not the lock mechanism was functional.
I do not know the outcome of this case.
MIDDLETOWN, MIDDLESEX COUNTY, CONNECTICUT; August 24, 2000
Juvenile case 00-110
Penal Code Sec. 53a-217b. Possession of a weapon on school grounds: Class D felony
Client: Maria Madsen Holzberg, Assistant Public Defender; Julia Schaefer, Investigator
Office of the Public Defender, Juvenile Court
The defendant was arrested for possession of a "gravity knife" on
school grounds. However the knife in his possession was instead a
butterfly knife (balisong). Ms. Schaefer sent me a photo of this knife.
I prepared a report setting forth the differences between a butterfly
knife and a gravity knife, including a variety of illustrations showing
the operation of both types of knives. The report and illustrations were
used as evidence in court. I do not know the outcome of this case.
MEDFORD, JACKSON COUNTY, OREGON; September 26, 2000
State vs John L. Holzhauser, Case # 00217356 - 5/27/00
ORS 166.240 Illegal Concealed Weapon (x2)
Client: Michael E. Kellington (Kellington & Kellington)
Mr. Holzhauser was arrested for posting a sign on his property that said
SPEED TRAP AHEAD. The arresting officer asked if he were carrying
any weapons. He said, no, but added that he did have two sheath knives,
both of them Columbia River Knife & Tool KISS models, one with a
tanto style blade, the other with a wharncliffe blade. The officer then
charged him with violating ORS 166.240, carrying concealed upon his person
"any dirk, dagger, ice pick... or any similar instrument by the use of
which injury could be inflicted..."
I was called to testify in a pre-trial hearing, in which I explained
why neither of these knives was a dirk or dagger. The question then remained
as to whether or not they were "similar instruments."
At the judge's request, I then prepared a written report on the history
and application of tantos and wharncliffe knives. After reading this report,
the judge ordered that the charges under ORS 166.240 be dismissed.
PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON; June 28, 2001
In the Matter of David C_______, A Youth
ORS 166.360 Possession of an illegal weapon on school grounds
Clients: Nancy Cozine, attorney (Metropolitan Public Defender)
Nathalie L. Darcy, Alternative Sentencing Advocate
Mr. C_______ was arrested for possession of a knife on
public school grounds. His attorney maintained that this knife
is an ordinary pocketknife, exempt from the law. I examined
pictures of the knife, determined it to be a Gerber LST model,
and wrote a report setting forth the history of this model, and
explaining why it is an ordinary pocketknife by current standards.
The case was dismissed July 10, 2001.
EUGENE, LANE COUNTY, OREGON; August 3, 2001
State of Oregon vs. Michael Raymond Gieselman; Circuit Court 20-01-03167
ORS 166.240 Illegal Concealed Weapon
ORS 166.270 Felon possessing restricted weapon
Client: John C. Volmert, attorney (Public Defender Services of Lane County)
Mr. Gieselman was charged with, among other things,
possession of a concealed "dirk or dagger." I examined pictures
of the knife in evidence, and determined it to be an unmodified
Buck Model 118 "Personal" hunting knife. I was prepared to
testify at trial that this knife is not a dirk or dagger.
However when the prosecutor was informed that I would be
testifying to this effect, he dismissed the knife-related charges.
EUGENE, LANE COUNTY, OREGON; August 14, 2001
State of Oregon vs. Ryan Verle Baarstad; Circuit Court 20-00-06166
ORS 166.240 Illegal Concealed Weapon
Clients: Thomas L. Fagan, Dick Lofton, attorneys (Public Defender Services of Lane County)
Mr. Baarstad was charged with, among other things,
possession of a concealed "dirk or dagger." I examined pictures
of the knife in evidence, and determined it to be an unmodified
Buck Model 119 "Special" hunting knife. I prepared a two-page
written report setting out my interpretation of the legal
meaning of "dirk" and "dagger," and explaining why this knife
is neither. I was subpoenaed to appear at trial August 23, but
on August 14, 2001, I was informed that the concealed weapon
charge against Mr. Baarstad had been dismissed.
PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON; October 30, 2001
State vs Robert Dwight White; Circuit Court 01-07-47987
ORS 166.240 Carrying an illegal concealed weapon
Client: Amy Baggio, attorney (Metropolitan Public Defender)
Nathalie L. Darcy, Alternative Sentencing Advocate
Mr. White, of Washington, attempted to enter the Justice
center in Portland with two concealed knives on his person.
One of these was an all-steel double-edged throwing knife. The
officer on duty informed him that it was illegal to carry this
knife concealed in Oregon, but if he would surrender it, he
would not be charged. Mr. White declined this offer, and was
then arrested. I examined photos of this throwing knife, and
determined that it was sufficiently similar to a dagger to be
considered a dagger under Oregon law. I do not know the
outcome of this case.
PORTLAND, MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREGON; November 29, 2001
State vs Avel Ivanovich Revenko; Circuit Court 01-09-50867
ORS 166.240 Carrying illegal concealed weapon
Client: Adam Arms, attorney (Metropolitan Public Defender)
Mr. Revenko was arrested for carrying a folding knife,
described in the charge as, "an instrument similar to a
knife having a blade that projects or swings into position
by force of a spring or by centrifugal force which was
designed and intended for use as a weapon and could be used
to inflict injury..." The issue in this case was whether
or not the knife was designed primarily as a weapon.
I examined photos of the knife, and determined that
it was a conventional pocketknife, with a a single-edged
clip-point blade, and no guard. It was not designed
or intended primarily as a weapon. I do not know the
outcome of this case.
GO BACK TO PAGE 1 of Knife-Related Legal Cases
GO BACK TO PAGE 2 of Knife-Related Legal Cases
GO BACK TO PAGE 3 of Knife-Related Legal Cases
Return to BERNARD LEVINE'S Knife-Related LINKS Page
Go to my STATE KNIFE LAWS links page
Go to BERNARD LEVINE's BizCard page
BERNARD LEVINE * PO BOX 2404 * EUGENE OREGON 97402 * 541-484-0294