Located in Eugene, the Law Office of Max J Mizejewski defends clients throughout Southern Oregon and the Willamette Valley against criminal charges. Mr. Mizejewski provides an aggressive defense against state and federal prosecutors.

Mr. Mizejewski believes everyone's rights should be protected, and everyone deserves the best possible defense. If you have been charged with a criminal offense, you need to know your rights.  We can defend you against your criminal charges, including the following:

Eugene, Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyer

•Drunk Driving (DUII, DUI, DWI) - including underage drinking and driving, refusing a breathalyzer test, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and other drug or alcohol related driving offenses
•Criminal Driving Offenses - including manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, assault, hit & run, attempting to elude police, reckless driving and licensure issues
•Drug Crimes - including possession, delivery, and manufacturing of marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, designer drugs and prescription drugs
•Property Crimes - including theft, embezzlement, forgery, fraud, computer crimes and burglary
•Violent Crimes - including menacing, stalking and assault
•Stalking - including criminal offenses and civil actions
For more information about Oregon criminal law, Oregon criminal courts,  the criminal process, or to discuss your criminal charges with an experienced criminal defense attorney, please call 541-505-9872 or contact us online.

Max Mizejewski received his undergraduate degree from the University of California at Berkeley in 1993. In 1997, Max graduated from Northwestern School of Law of Lewis and Clark College and went on to work in the public sector before entering private practice. As Manager of the Oregon Department of Transportation Environmental Unit, Max gained valuable experience negotiating, problem solving and working through confrontational issues with emotionally charged individuals. Max brings this experience to his private practice which focuses on criminal defense and family law.

A federal judge will hear closing arguments Wednesday in a groundbreaking trial on a lawsuit that seeks to establish marriage as a fundamental constitutional right for gays and lesbians.

The latest effort to overturn California's Prop. 8 gay-marriage ban is wrapping up in federal court today, with Ted Olson and David Boies--the attorneys for George W. Bush and Al Gore in the Florida 2000 court case--presenting final arguments. (For a liveblog of what's going on, check in with Firedoglake.) Gay-marriage proponents have voiced optimism about this case since it mirrors the case that successfully ended California's gay-marriage ban in 2008, ultimately leading to the Prop. 8 campaign to ban it again.

The case is being heard by District Judge Vaughn Walker (who heard the al Hamarain case and ruled the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program illegal); it seems likely that, regardless of the result, it will be appealed ad infinitum.

The issue is part of an ongoing disagreement Texas and the EPA have over how pollution is regulated in the state, said Terry Clawson, a spokesman for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. In recent weeks, debate has focused on the state's use of so-called flexible permits, which sets a general limit on how much pollutants an entire facility can release.

In a news release, Abbott's office criticized the EPA for taking more than a decade before deciding to reject the law and said it filed the legal challenge "in an effort to defend the state's legal rights and challenge improper overreach by the federal government."

Lawyers for 39-year-old Bill Furman have asked in the federal discrimination lawsuit filed Wednesday that the rule be changed so he has the chance to become eligible for certification. The state police oversees certification.

Furman is a parking officer and constable. He lives in Boalsburg.

He was set to attend a police training academy last year when he said he was told he couldn't continue because of his hearing aids.

The Supreme Court has rejected an appeal from a Canadian engineer who was caught up in the U.S. government's secret transfer of terror suspects to other countries.

The court did not comment Monday in ending Syrian-born Maher Arar's quest to sue top U.S. officials, including former Attorney General John Ashcroft. Arar says he was mistaken for a terrorist when he was changing planes in New York on his way home to Canada, a year after the 2001 terrorist attacks. He was instead sent to Syria, where he claims he was tortured.

Lower courts dismissed Arar's lawsuit, which asserts the U.S. purposely sent him to Syria to be tortured. Syria has denied he was tortured.

The Canadian government agreed to pay Arar $10 million and apologized to him for its role in the case.

A Canadian investigation found that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police wrongly labeled Arar an Islamic fundamentalist and passed misleading and inaccurate information to U.S. authorities.

The inquiry determined that Arar was tortured, and it cleared him of any terrorist links or suspicions.