We all know that one's driver's license is the primary form of identification in this country.  That driver's license is supposed to reflect what we look like and where we can be found, as Mr. Dusek pointed out.  When you are stopped by the police they will demand identification so that they know to whom they are speaking.  By what process did Mr. Orlosky arrive at the conclusion that it was permissible to live in Jamul and have an Oregon license showing his residence as being in Oregon?  When he applied for his Oregon license, he stated that he had to give up his California license, so he knew that he could not hold licenses from two states.  How did he think that it would be right to move back to California and not reapply for a California license?
    If Oregon renews by mail, where did they send the renewal application?  It would not have been to his Jamul address.  It would have been to the address listed as his residence in Oregon.  That means that there must be some form of collusion involved, as I don't think they would send a renewal form to a post office box.  Someone must have sent the renewal to him in Jamul, or at least let him know that it had arrived so that he could go back up to Oregon and renewed in person.  That still raises the question of perjury.  If he signed a renewal form, he knew he was not living in Oregon.  We know by his own admission that he falsified his application for a California driver's license on a previous occasion, so this later act begins to establish a pattern.  It still was quite a stretch to come up with the explanation involving the Commercial Motor Vehicle Act.  I think he had this worked out long ago just in case he had to explain himself.  I am sure that it sounded just fine to the jury.