Trials

In The Courtroom - Jury Trials

When you find yourself involved in the justice system it is important to have an attorney with a reputation for a willingness to take his or her cases to trial. It is even better when your attorney is a recognized winner in the courtroom. It has been our experience at Stewart MacNichols Harmell, Inc., P.S., that over ninety percent of our cases resolve short of going to trial. Still, our attorneys have been trying cases for over 25 years, and prosecutors are aware that when necessary we are capable, aggressive trial attorneys who are not afraid to face them in front of a jury. The following are examples of trial victories by SMH attorneys: 
Rob Jensen

In November 2016, Rob Jensen represented K.G. on two counts of Assault 4-DV in Municipal Court.  Rob successfully used the defenses of self defense and defense of others.  On the morning of trial, the prosecution added additional charges in an attempt to force a plea.  The jury returned a verdict of not guilty after approximately 40 minutes of deliberations.



Rob Jensen
 
In November 2016, Rob Jensen represented J.M.G at jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Disorderly Conduct. The case involved multiple Spanish interpreters and lasted 1.5 days. The prosecution tried to establish that his client started a bar fight. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty after 20 minutes of deliberations.

 Ken Harmell

In October 2016,  Ken Harmell represented J.P. in municipal court on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. J.P. was accused of assaulting his daughter. The City’ evidence consisted of the testimony of the alleged victim, police officers and video that the alleged victim had taken of the incident on her cell phone. Ken argued that J.P. and his daughter were in a property dispute and that she fabricated the altercation in an attempt to gain an advantage with the courts. Ken introduced the fact that on two prior occasions she had attempted to obtain restraining orders and that both times they were denied. The jury returned a verdict of not Guilty  

Kaitlin Pimentel

In October of 2016, Kaitlin Pimentel represented R. N. at a jury trial in District Court on a charge of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer. The City's alleged that R. N. was delaying the officers in the discharge of their duties by not adhering to their commands in a timely manner. The City's only witnesses were three fellow police officers. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

Ken Harmell

In September 2016, Ken Harmell represented R.J on one count of Nuisance in Municipal Court . R.J. was accused of obtaining a boat for free off of offer up, and then dumping the boat in lake so that he could sell the trailer. The City’s witnesses included the man who had given away the boat on offer up, an employee of offer up to testify that there records showed R.J had acquired the boat, the individual who discovered the boat submerged in the lake and two police officers. Ken argued that there was only circumstantial evidence that the defendant was the one who had sunk the boat and the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.  

Sean Parrent

In September 2016, Sean Parrent represented A.Y. in an assault domestic violence trial. The eye-witness testified that his client repeatedly punched a woman while they were both inside a parked car. Sean established that the windows of the car were rolled up and had tinted windows, and that the eye-witness and two responding officers each gave different versions of what the alleged victim's injuries were. The jury found his client not guilty.

Ken Harmell

In August 2016, Ken Harmell represented A.H. in municipal court on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree. A.H. was accused of assaulting a neighbor who had taken her keys away because she believed A.H. was driving under the influence of alcohol. The city alleged that A.H. voluntarily handed over her keys and then changed her mind and attacked the alleged victim when she would not give the keys back. Ken argued that the neighbor was racist and became hostile when A.H’s African American boyfriend showed up, and that it was the neighbor not A.H. that was the primary aggressor. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Chris Sims

Chris Sims represented T.S. in August 2016, on one count of Assault 4 in District court. The state presented Video evidence to the jury that showed T.S. had strangled the alleged victim and then threw him to the ground where he was held down for over 1 minute and 10 seconds in a choke hold sleeper hold. Mr. Sims then presented evidence that the alleged victim had started the fight and was the primary aggressor then the jury deliberated for 4 hours and 5 of the six jurors said T.S. was not guilty and were deadlocked. The state decided not to continue to pursue the case and the case was dismissed.   

David Iannotti

In July of 2016, David Iannotti represented M.N. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court for Criminal Trespass in the Second degree. Three officers testified that M.N. refused to leave a gas station after being trespassed from the gas station. David successfully moved to dismiss the charge after the City rested and failed to prove its case.

Ken Harmell

In July Ken Harmell 2016, represented R.O. in municipal court on one count of Assault. The City accused R.O. of assaulting a truck driver after a dispute over a chipped windshield. The City alleged that the defendant jumped up onto the gas tank of the truck and punched the driver in the face knocking out two teeth. Ken argued that based on the size of the truck and that R.O.’s actions were reasonable and necessary and that R.O would have been seriously injured or killed had he not punched the driver. The jury agreed and returned a verdict of Not Guilty 

David Iannotti
 
In July of 2016, David Iannotti represented S.W. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court for Assault in the Fourth Degree. The City alleged that S.W. punched his manager several times after he was fired from his job. Another employee from the job witnessed the incident and testified for the City. S.W. was the only defense witness and claimed he acted in self-defense. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

David Iannotti 

In July of 2016, David Iannotti represented S.G. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court for Assault in the Fourth Degree of a Police Officer. The City alleged that S.G. kicked an officer in the face. Three Officers testified for the City. S.G. did not testify. David successfully argued that the City failed to prove S.G. had intent to kick the Officer in the face. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

David Iannotti
 
In May 2016, David Iannotti represented R.H. at a Jury Trial in District Court for Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The City alleged that R.H. viciously attacked his girlfriend by grabbing her hair, throwing her up against the wall and dragging her by her hair around his house. R.H. testified that he acted in self-defense after his ex-girlfriend walked in on him and another woman. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
 
David Iannotti
 
In May 2016, David Iannotti represented Y.B. at a Jury Trial in District Court for Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. Y.B.’s girlfriend alleged that Y.B. slapped her head multiple times and grabbed her hair. Y.B. testified that his girlfriend had assaulted him and he acted in self-defense. His injuries were consistent with this claim. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

Rob Jensen

In April 2016, Rob Jensen represented J.S. at a Jury Trial on a second offense physical in Municipal Court.  He asserted the defense of safely off the roadway.  The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty after 40 minutes of deliberation.

Sean Parrent 

In March 2016, Sean represented R.D. at a jury trial on an Assault in the 4th Degree case in Municipal Court. Sean pointed out several inconsistencies in the testimony of the prosecution's witnesses, and showed that the investigating police officers failed in their duty to collect evidence of injuries to the alleged victim and gather information from an eyewitness. The jury found the client Not Guilty. 

Sean Parrent

In March 2016, Sean represented J.P. in a Possession of Stolen Property 3rd Degree Jury Trial in Municipal Court. Before the start of the trial, but after the jury was selected and sworn in, Sean successfully argued to the court that certain hearsay evidence should not be used by the prosecutor at trial. At that point, the prosecutor was forced to concede that the case against J.P., and terminating the case and resulting in dismissal. 

 David Iannotti

In March 2016, David Iannotti represented D.W. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court for Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. Police responded to a road-rage call, where two citizen witnesses alleged that D.W. was tailgating and recklessly driving through an apartment complex parking lot. D.W. admitted to consuming alcohol and refused to do Field Sobriety Tests. D.W. was the only defense witness. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

Sean Parrent

In February 2016, Sean Parrent represented K.A. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on a theft case. The client was accused of selling his smart phone and then reporting the phone as lost/stolen, causing the phone to be shut off and the buyer losing the value of the phone. Sean was able to show that neither the buyer or investigating police officer had any expertise in smart phones, and therefore were of no value in explaining how the phone had been disabled. Sean also pointed out that the prosecutor had not called any other witnesses who could explain what happened to the phone. The jury found K.A. not guilty. 

Sean Parrent

In January 2016, Sean Parrent represented J.T. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court. The client was accused of hitting and shoving a coworker. The coworker was uninjured, but another employee testified that he witnessed the alleged assault. Sean was able to point out several inconsisties in the alleged victim's story, as well as establish that the witness only saw the incident for a couple of seconds and did not have a clear view of what happened. The jury found the client not guilty.

David Iannotti

In November 2015, David Iannotti represented D.M. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court for Driving Under the Influence of Phencyclidine (PCP) and Hydrocodone. Two undercover detectives witnessed D.M. driving down Pacific Highway. They contacted a DUI patrol officer to stop D.M. after they witnessed his car swerve multiple times from lane to lane almost causing an accident with another car. The DUI patrol Officer had D.M. perform field sobriety tests including the walk and turn, horizontal gaze nystagmus and the alphabet. D.M. fell over twice during the walk and turn and could not keep his balance at all. D.M. was only able to recite “A,B,C, Q, R,F” for the alphabet. The officer stopped doing FSTs after he felt it was unsafe for D.M. to continue. After admitting to smoking marijuana and consuming Hydrocodone, D.M. was arrested and examined by a Drug Recognition Expert (DRE). The DRE determined that D.M. was under the influence of PCP and Hydrocodone based on his examination. D.M.’s blood was examined by the Washington State Toxicologist and was determined to contain 50 ng/ml of PCP and 20 ng/ml of hydrocodone. David was able to successfully convince the jury that while D.M. had PCP and Hydrocodone in his blood, the observations of the officers were inconsistent with the general indicators seen when a person consumes these drugs and that his ability to drive was not effected by PCP or Hydrocodone. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

David Iannotti

In November 2015, David Iannotti represented J.M. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court for Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana, Xanax, and Codeine. A citizen witness testified that she saw J.M. driving down a six lane highway swerving over ten times into oncoming traffic. She called 911 and an Officer contacted J.M. at a Wendy’s where his car was stopped diagonally in two separate parking spaces. The Officer contacted a Drug Recognition Expert to examine J.M. Based on field sobriety tests, J.M. was arrested and a warrant was obtained to examine his blood. The Toxicologist who examined his blood testified that it contained THC, Xanax and Codeine. David was able to successfully argue that while J.M. had consumed these drugs, his ability to drive was not effected and the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

Emily Prest

In October 2015, Emily Prest represent N.C. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on one count of Assault Domestic Violence (DV) and one count of Harassment Domestic Violence (DV). The prosecution claimed that verbal argument escalated when N.C. and the alleged victim, which culminated in N.C. punching the alleged victim in the left eye, throwing her onto a love seat, and bending her fingers back so far she thought her hand came close to breaking. In addition, they alleged that N.C. threatened her by stating "Are you afraid to die?" According to the testimony of the alleged victim, she contacted her daughter and brother online who convinced her to report assault and threat approximately six hours after alleged attack occurred. N.C. claimed it was a case of self defense of and defense of property which became necessary when the alleged victim escalated a verbal argument by throwing items in the apartment at him, and attempting to take his school laptop and throw it on the floor. N.C claimed that he restrained her by grabbing her wrists and pushing her onto the love seat. Furthermore, only when she slapped him in the face, did he bend her fingers back to prevent a continued assault. N.C. stated that he did ask the question "Are you afraid to die?" because earlier in the day, E.H. threatened to jump from a moving vehicle and he was concerned as to her mental state. N.C. stated that he then left the apartment and returned home. He was arrested 6 hours later and told officers he that no such assault and threat occurred. The jury returned verdict of Not Guilty on both counts.

Chris Sims

In October 2015, Chris Sims represented B.R. who was initially charged with three separate charges. Chris was able to obtain a dismissal of count three, Unlawful Display of a Weapon, via a pretrial motion. Chris then went on to represent B.R. at Jury Trial on one count of Assault Domestic Violence and one count of Harassment Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged at trial that during an argument over property, B.R. had made a threat amounting to harassment, after having pulled out a knife and telling his wife that he was going to make her his victim. In addition to the threat, the prosecution alleged that B.R. had then assaulted his wife by grabbing a piece of property, which they wrestled over, and during this process pushing her on top of their five gallon water bottles where he continued the assault, grabbing and squeezing her hands, and then after she had gotten up, that B.R. then tried to pull her purse off her shoulder. The defense position was that B.R. acted lawfully in protecting his property persuant it to defense of property defense and that the B.R. had not made any such threat or made any other efforts of an assault. The prosecution witnesses included the alleged victim and the two investigating police officer. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on both counts.

David Iannotti

In October 2015, David Iannotti represented L.H. at a Jury Trial on one count of Patronizing a Prostitute in Municipal Court. The City set up a sting operation where they posted a fictitious advertisement for an escort on backpages.com in an attempt to catch “Johns” that call the ad to hire prostitutes. The City alleged that L.H. had called the undercover officer, requesting and agreeing to pay money for sex, then arrested L.H. when he knocked on the hotel room door which was provided to him by the undercover officer. David filed and argued a motion contesting the jurisdiction of the City to arrest defendants on these types of cases. After the Court split on the decision, David brought the motion to Superior Court on a Writ of Certiorari. Normally a defendant can be convicted of Patronizing if they offer to pay money for sexual conduct, agree to pay money for sexual conduct or pay money for sexual conduct. The result of the motion limited the City’s ability to argue at trial to only whether L.H. made an actual “agreement” with the undercover officer. At trial, three officers testified about their investigation and contact with L.H., L.H. elected not to testify based on David’s advice. David was able to successfully argue that no agreement had been made and the jury returned a verdict of Not guilty.

Emily Prest

In September 2015 Emily Prest represented S.S. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on one count of Assault Domestic Violence. The defense argued that a harmful or offensive touching did not occur and was not intended. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Chris Sims and Kellie Clifton

In September 2015, Chris Sims and Kellie Clifton represented A.R. at a Jury Trial on one count of Assault Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that A.R. assaulted his girlfriend by grabbing her arms, pulling her down on the couch and punching her in the face. The defense position was that A.R. acted in self defense. The prosecution witnesses included the alleged victim, another alleged eyewitness to the event, and the investigating police officer. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Kristin Fay

In September of 2015, Kristin Fay represented K.A. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4 Domestic Violence. It was alleged that he strangled his wife in the parking lot of a local casino. The defense used the City's own witnesses to impeach the credibility of the alleged victim. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Scott Stewart

In September 2015, Scott Stewart represented B.V.S at a Jury Trial on one count of Driving Under the Influence in District Court. The prosecution filed a motion to add one count of Reckless Endangerment, but withdrew their motion after reading Scott's reply brief. The case involved a number of Motions to Suppress, and ultimately culminated in a jury trial. The prosecution alleged that the arresting Washington State Trooper was drawn to B.V.S. when a citizen driving down Interstate 5 signaled the Trooper and pointed at B.V.S.'s vehicle. The Trooper moved behind B.V.S. and started video recording his driving. According to the prosecution, the Trooper's testimony and the video, B.V.S. was weaving out of his lane, driving at variable speeds and slow to respond to the Trooper's emergency lights. The Trooper testified that B.V.S. performed poorly on the FSTs, and made some incriminating statements. The breath test in the case was a .11 and a .12. In addition to the Trooper, the prosecution called two expert witnesses, a member of the Washington State Toxicologist's Office, and a WSP Breath Test Technician. n cross examination and during closing argument Scott was able to point out inconsistencies between the video, and the Trooper's testimony. He argued that these inconsistencies raised reasonable doubts as to the balance of the Trooper's testimony. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Ken Harmell

In September 2015, Ken Harmell represented G.T. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on one count of Malicious Mischief in the Third Degree. The prosecution alleged that he had intentionally damaged the top of a car. The defense denied that G.T. had caused the damage, and argued that if any damage was caused it was not done maliciously, but with the intent to protect G.T.'s own property. The prosecution's witnesses included the alleged victim, his friend, G.T.'s girlfriend and two police officers. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Emily Prest

In August 2015, Emily Prest represented N.J. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on one count of Prostitution. The defense argued that it was a sting intended to find informants, and there was a no acceptance of a sexual act. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

In August 2015, David Iannotti represented E.B. at a Jury Trial for two separate counts of Violation of a Protection Order Domestic Violence and one count of Malicious Mischief in the Third Degree Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that E.B. intentionally and maliciously damaged his roommates kayak after being served with a protection order. E.B. allegedly did this in front of two of his roommates, who both testified. E.B. then returned to the house on two separate occasions. The police found him there on the 2nd occasion and he was arrested at the scene. Four roommates and the three police officers testified. Mr. Burke was the only defense witness. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

In June 2015, David Iannotti represented K.D. at a Jury Trial on one count of Assault Domestic Violence and one count Theft Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that K.D. assaulted his girlfriend by grabbing her arms, slapping her face, and forcefully removing her from a car in a hotel parking lot. The defendant then allegedly ran off with his girlfriend’s car keys. The defense position was that K.D. acted in self defense. The prosecution witnesses included the alleged victim and the investigating police officer. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Kristin Fay

In February of 2015, Kristin Fay represented S.F. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Unlawful Display of Weapon in the Municipal Court. The City alleged that the defendant pulled a gun on another driver in the course of a road rage incident. The defense argued that the alleged victim was using his vehicle as a weapon and the defendant lawfully displayed his gun in a manner to protect himself and scare the other driver away. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Kristin Fay

In February of 2015, Kristin Fay represented F.G. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer. The defense argued that the defendant did not willfully hinder the officer, rather he was feeling harassed because officers contacted him without cause. Defense further argued that his actions were designed to express his feelings, not delay the officer. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

On January 2015, David Iannotti represented L.H. at a Jury Trial on one count of Patronizing a Prostitute in Municipal Court. L.H. was arrested when he allegedly made an offer and agreement with an undercover officer that was posing as a prostitute on Pacific Highway. Multiple officers from the undercover sting testified for the City. David was able to convince the Jury to return a verdict of Not Guilty based on a minor error in the police report involving cutting and pasting language from a separate report.

Kristin Fay and Emily Prest

In November of 2014, Kristin Fay and Emily Prest represented J.B. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on charges of Assault 4 Domestic Violence and Malicious Mischief Domestic Violence. The City argued that the defendant punched the alleged victim and then later after she left the house, he destroyed her property. The defense successfully argued that the alleged victim was not credible and that there was insufficient evidence that J.B. damaged her property. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

In August 2014, David Iannotti represented M.T. at a Jury Trial on one count of Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana. M.T. was stopped for making an illegal U-turn and driving on a shoulder. Upon contact with M.T., the officer smelled the odor of marijuana and saw that M.T. had bloodshot watery eyes and was carrying a baggie of what appeared to be marijuana. M.T. was unsteady on his feet and was having difficulty following the officer’s directions. After taking field sobriety tests the officer arrested M.T. for Driving Under the Influence. The officer obtained a warrant for M.T.’s blood, which came back with 11 ng/ml of THC. David filed a motion contesting the Constitutionality of the 5 ng/ml THC law, which the City conceded resulting in the case going forward under the affected by prong. Based on the concession, David successfully suppressed the 11 ng/ml THC result. Two officers and M.T. testified at the jury trial. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Kristin Fay

In September of 2014, Kristin Fay represented S.B. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on one count of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer and one count of Resisting Arrest. The defense argued that the officers went beyond the scope of their duties and the defendant's response to their actions was not criminal in nature. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

On July 2014, David Iannotti represented K.S. at a Jury Trial on one count of Theft in the Third Degree in Municipal Court. K.S. allegedly walked into Rite-Aid grabbed bag of charcoal and walked out of the store without paying for the charcoal. The investigating officer and the loss prevention officer testified for the City. In addition to the testimony, the City also had photos of K.S. that were taking during the alleged incident. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

On May 2014, David Iannotti represented A.L. at a Jury Trial on one count of Harassment in Municipal Court. A.L. allegedly called and threatened the staff of 24 Hour Fitness seven times after being removed from their facilities. Two staff members of 24 Hour Fitness and two police officers testified on behalf of the City. Mr. Lofgren was the only defense witness. David successfully argued that A.L.’s contact with 24 Hour Fitness was neither threatening nor inappropriate based on the contact between the two. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

On April 2014, David Iannotti represented C.C. at a Jury Trial on one Count of Driving Under the Influence in Municipal Court. C.C. was allegedly driving south on Interstate 5 while under the influence of alcohol. An off-duty officer witnessed C.C. swerving in her lane, striking another vehicle. Three police officers testified for the City. The matter was Dismissed with Prejudice after the City rested its case because the City failed to prove where the crime was committed. David had purposefully not raised the issue of jurisdiction to prevent any other City from prosecuting C.C. for the same crime.

David iannotti

On January 2014, David Iannotti represented T.B. at a Jury Trial on one count of Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana in Municipal Court. T.B. was initially stopped for driving a vehicle that had illegally tinted windows. When the officer signaled for T.B. to stop his vehicle, T.B. did not stop and proceeded to drive slowly into a parking lot. The passenger jumped out of the vehicle and ran away. Upon being stopped, the arresting officer, who was a trained Drug Recognition Expert suspected that T.B. was under the influence of marijuana. This was based on the overwhelming smell of marijuana coming from T.B. and his vehicle, a marijuana joint in the ashtray, “obvious” signs of impairment and an admission to smoking marijuana. The officer obtained a warrant to draw T.B.’s blood, which also contained THC. Two officers and a toxicologist from the Washington State Toxicology Lab testified on behalf of the City. Mr. Bates was the only defense witness. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Scott Stewart

In October 2013, Scott Stewart represented D.L. at a Jury Trial on one count of Driving With License Suspended in the Second Degree. Scott challenged the sufficiency of the evidence testified to by the arresting officer and the Department of Licensing Representative. The trial resulted in a hung jury, followed by a prosecution Motion to Dismiss.

Sam Oh

In September 2013, Sam Oh represented at a Jury Trial on one count of Driving With License Suspended in the First Degree. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

On August 2013, David Iannotti represented M.D.L. at a Jury Trial on one Count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. M.D.L. allegedly assaulted the mother of his children by pushing her down onto a couch and slapping her in front of her teen daughter and other members of the family. The alleged victim, one family member and the arresting officers testified on behalf of the City. The daughter and M.D.L. were the only defense witnesses. David successfully argued and convinced the jury that M.D.L. was not perpetrator and they returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Chris Sims

In July 2013, Chris Sims represented J.A. at Jury Trial on one count of Hit and Run Unattended in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that J.A. has knowingly backed into his neighbor’s car and drove off without notifying the neighbors. The prosecution had video of the incident as well as had the neighbor and investigating officer testify. The Chris was able to successfully argue to the jury using the city’s own video that J.A. had backed out and then in the ordinary course J.A. had pulled away not realizing he had hit the neighbor’s car. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti 

In June 2013, David Iannotti represented V.M.T. at a Jury Trial on one Count of Patronizing a Prostitute. V.M.T. was arrested when he allegedly made an offer and agreement with an undercover officer that was posing as a prostitute on Pacific Highway. Multiple officers from the undercover sting testified for the City. David was able to convince the Jury to return a verdict of Not Guilty based on an argument that the officers coerced V.M.T. to admit to patronizing in order to be released.

Ken Harmell

In April 2013, Ken Harmell represented D.H. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on one count of Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana and one count of Driving WIth License Suspended in the Third Degree. The court dismissed the Driving With License Suspended charge, and the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on the Driving Under the Influence charge.

Kristin Fay

In April of 2013, the S.D. was represented by Kristin Fay at trial on charges of Disorderly Conduct, Criminal Trespass 2 and Resisting Arrest in Municipal Court. The City alleged that the defendant was remaining at a restaurant after being asked to leave and made comments to others in order to provoke a fight. The defense argued that the comments were designed to express an opinion, not start a fight and that the defendant left as soon as practicable after paying for his meal. The defense further argued that the officer’s actions gave the defendant insufficient time to knowingly resist arrest. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Seth Chastain

In March 2013, Seth Chastain represented A.K. at a jury trial on one count of Driving Under the Influence and one count of Reckless Driving in Municipal Court. The witnesses for the prosecution included the arresting officer and a tow truck driver. The breath alcohol level was .01. The defense called the defendant and an additional witness. Seth was able to raise significant doubts as to the accuracy of the arresting officer's sworn testimony that A.K. was driving the vehicle. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on each charge.

David Iannotti

In March 2013, David Iannotti represented S.L.B. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. S.L.B. was accused of grabbing and hitting his girlfriend in the presence of their two children. The alleged victim, the two children and two police officers testified for the city. S.L.B. was the only defense witness. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Scott Stewart and Kirk Mahjoubian

In March 2013, Scott Stewart and Kirk Mahjoubian represented I.M. at a jury trial on on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree in Municipal Court. The witnesses for the prosecution included the arresting officer, the alleged victim and an independent witness. The defense called the defendant and an additional witnesses. Scott and Kirk were able to raise doubts about the credibility of the prosecution's witnesses, as well as the quality of the police investigation. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

Kristin Fay

In February of 2013, Kristin Fay represented W.M. at a Jury Trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Malicious Mischief. The defense argued that defendant was being harassed by his neighbor and the alleged victim’s testimony was not credible. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Kristin Fay

In February of 2013, Kristin Fay represented J.B. at trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Driving With License SUspended in the First Degree / Habiitual Offender. The defense was able to successfully suppress the driving record during trial. The City was unable to proceed and the case was Dismissed.

David Iannotti

In February 2013, David Iannotti represented A.S. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. A.S. was accused of assaulting his girlfriend by slapping her several times in front of her cousin. The alleged victim, the victim’s cousin and two police officers testified for the city. The defendant was the only defense witness. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Kristin Fay

In January 2013, Kristin Fay represented M.B. in the Municipal Court on charges of Driving Under the Influence and Assault 4. The defense argued that the City did not present reliable and sufficient evidence that an Assault had occurred. Additionally, the defense argued that the City was unable to establish that M.B. was under the influence at the time of driving. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on both counts. 

Chris Sims

In November, 2012, Rule 9 Chris Sims represented L.N. at a jury trial on one count of Reckless Driving and one count of Criminal Trespass in the Second Degree. The city alleged that the L.N. was in a private parking lot doing wheelies on his motorcycle placing persons and property in danger. They further alleged that the he was doing wheelies on his bike dangerously close to those who were spectating. They also alleged that at any time a vehicle or person could have unknowingly crossed the defendant's path. FInally, they alleged that the L.N. entered or remained unlawfully upon the premises, and that he should have honored the no trespass signs posted at the only two entrances into the property. The defense successfully argued that the defendant had not been the person riding the motorcycle and that the city did not establish that the defendant did not have permission to be on the premises. After 50 minutes of deliberation the jury came back with a verdict of Not Guilty on both counts.

David Iannotti

In November 2012, David Iannotti went to trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. T.W. was alleged to have been under the influence of marijuana. Evidence introduced by the prosecution included blood test results of 6.8 ng/ml of THC and 111 ng/ml of carboxy, the testimony of the officer who stopped T.W., a "Drug Recognition Expert," and the toxicologist who examined the blood. The defendant did not testify. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

In October 2012, David Iannotti went to trial in Municipal Court on charges of Disorderly Conduct, Resisting Arrest and Obstructing. F.E.F was accused of walking down the middle of the street drunk, pulling scissors on an officer and then attempting to flee and resist arrest by the officer. A citizen witness and the officer testified for the city. David made a successful motion to dismiss based on evidentiary issues and got the case dismissed before the jury could make a decision.

Seth Chastain

In October 2012, Seth Chastain represented L.S. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree, Domestic Violence, According to the witnesses for the prosecution, neighbors at an apartment complex call the police because they hear people yelling at each other. Police arrived to find the defendant’s wife crying, hysterical, and injured. Based on the her sworn statement, the officers arrested the L.S. for pushing the her onto the pavement and grabbing her with force in an attempt to prevent her from leaving the apartment. The City had three officers and the alleged victim testify. L.S. also testified. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Ken Harmell

In October 2012, Ken Harmell represented R.F. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree, Domestic Violence. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Chris Sims

In October, 2012, Rule 9 Chris Sims represented E.H.A. at a jury trial in municipal court on one count of Driving While License Suspended. The prosecution alleged that E.H.A. was driving his brother-in-law's car. They further alleged that he admitted that he was "driving to the gas station." They also presented testimony from the arresting officer who told the jury that she had an unobstructed view of the driver and the driver of the car was the E.H.A.. Chris successfully argued to the jury that E.H.A had not been driving the car and the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Rob Jensen

In October 2012 Rob Jensen represented R.A. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on charges of Malicious Mischief 3rd Degree Domestic Violence and Assault 4 Domestic Violence. R.A. was accused of throwing boxes at his girlfriend at a storage facility. He was also accused of damaging her property. The alleged victim, R.A.'s girlfriend, and police officers tesitfied on behalf of the city. The jury returned with a verdict of Not Guilty on both counts.

David Iannotti

In October 2012, David Iannotti represented G.D. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence at a trial in Municipal Court. G.D. was accused of threatening his sister, showing up at her apartment and waiting for her to get home. It was alleged that he charged her car and started striking and choking her before as she got out of the car. He was also accused of trying to steal her car. The alleged victim, her boyfriend and the police officers testified on behalf of the city. G.D. was the defenses only witness. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

In August 2012, David Iannotti represented A.W.. at a jury trial on a charge of Attempted Theft in the Second Degree in Municipal Court. A.G. was allegedly seen swapping out a fake diamond stud earring for a real one at a jewelry store by an employee and was also caught on several video cameras. The witnesses included two employees, mall security and a police officer. There were no witnesses on behalf of the defense and the defendant did not testify. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Seth Chastain

In August 2012, Seth Chastain represented D.W. at a jury trial on one count of Obstructing a Public Servant in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that police officers initially pulled over the D.W. for Driving with License Suspended in the 3rd Degree after conducting a random DOL check. D.W. gave the officers his passport when asked for identification. Because the passport contained an error, the officers were not able to verify his identity. The officers testified that they repeatedly asked him for more information, which the he refused to provide. The officers then decided to take the D.W. to the station to check his identity. An officer stated that the he initially refused to get out of the vehicle, refused to spread his feet for a pat down, otherwise generally refused to follow the officers’ commands, and offered resistance when being taken into custody. The City had two officers testify. The D.W. was the defense’s only witness. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Scott Stewart

In July 2012. Scott Stewart represented J.K. in Municipal Court on charges of Driving Under the Influence and Hit and Run Unattended. Prior to trial the prosecution moved to amend the DUI charge to Reckless Driving. The case proceeded to trial on the amended charge of Reckless Driving and the Hit and Run Unattended. The prosecution alleged that the defendant drove recklessly while intoxicated, collided with the sign at the entrance to her condominium complex, and left the scene of the collision. The next morning when she was contacted by the police the defendant had a breath test above .20. The jury hung on both counts, but their preliminary votes favored the defense. Ultimately the all charges were dismissed.

Seth Chastain

In July 2012, Seth Chastain represented B.R. at a jury trial on one count of Obstructing a Public Servant in Municipal Court. The government alleged that the police were let into the home to investigate possible crimes and warrants. The defendant was not a suspect at this time. Officers initially arrested two people in the home, but not the B.R. Officers on scene ordered the B.R. to lie down. Multiple officers testified that, after initially complying, the he got up, became aggressive and defensive with them, and told them to leave the house. The officers also stated that the B.R. then refused to follow their commands, balled his fists, and took a fighting stance. At that time one of the officers took him down and arrested him for obstruction. The City had three officers testify. The B.R.’s girlfriend and mother took the stand to testify on his behalf. B.R. did not testify. The trial ultimately resulted in a hung jury, and the case was dismissed.

Chris Sims

In May 2012, Rule 9 Chris Sims assisted by Ken Harmell represented A.D.B at a jury trial on one count of Criminal Trespass in the Second Degree in cause number. The prosecution alleged that A.D.B. had violated a lawful trespass order barring him from all pierce county transit property. They had alleged that A.D.B. was found in the Pierce County Transit Administration building in violation of the previously issued trespass order. In the course of the jury trial. and subsequent to the jury being empanelled, the city attempted to enter the Trespass order into evidence. Mr. Sims objected based on lack of foundation/hearsay and upon argument by both the city and the defense the trespass order was barred from admission into evidence. At which point the city conceded that without the order they would be unable to proceed. Mr. Sims made and was granted a Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice.

Ken Harmell

In April 2012, Ken Harmell Represented D.E. on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree –Domestic Violence. The prosecution was alleged that the defendant had shoved his girlfriend to the ground where she was eventually trampled and knocked unconscious. The Defendant denied the allegation and claimed that a group of individuals had fabricated the allegations to cover up the assault they had committed against the Defendant. The prosecution had five witnesses scheduled to testify at trial. After cross examination of the prosecution's first two witnesses revealed massive inconsistencies the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the case, conceding that they could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ken Harmell and Chris Sims

In March 2012, Ken Harmell and Rule 9 Chris Sims d represented J.C.Y at a jury trial on one count of Animals Injuring Persons in cause number 11L1317 in Municipal Court. The city alleged that J.C.Y. owned and was responsible for a dog that had come out of an open door in the house where J.C.Y. lived biting a process server to the point of puncturing the skin on his leg. Animal control was called and they took the dog. At trial Ken was able to elicit testimony from one animal control officer which conflicted with the testimony of the other one involved in the case. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Sam Oh

In March 2012, Sam Oh represented S.E. at a jury trial on one count of Theft in the Third Degree in cause number 1Z0543211 in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that the defendant was a salesman who had gone to the victim’s home to demonstrate a product. After the presentation, the defendant left and the homeowner noted that an iPhone was missing. The defendant and his boss returned to the home to assist in looking for the phone. The phone was not found. The police were then called and ultimately found the phone in the defendant’s work bag. The defense argued that the phone could have been placed there by the defendant’s boss. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Sam Oh

In March 2012, Sam Oh represented R.F. at a jury trial on one count of Criminal Trespass in the Second Degree in cause number CR38504. The defendant had been trespassed from a store property. During motions in limine the city moved to add witnesses and new evidence to its case. Mr. Oh objected, and the court denied the city motion. The city was forced to voluntarily Dismiss the case as a result of the court’s ruling.

Sara Watson

In February 2012, Sara Watson represented E.W. at a jury trial on one count of Assault 4 Domestic Violence in cause number 11L1742 in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Scott Stewart

In February 2012, Scott Stewart Represented D.Y.K at a jury trial on one count of Obstructing a Public Servant in cause number K85770 in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that D.Y.K had operated her motor vehicle in a Negligent Manner and then attempted to run from the police. They further alleged that when contacted by the police she intentionally hindered and delayed them in the performance of their duties. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Ken Harmell

In February 2012, Ken Harmell represented T.B. at a jury trial on one count of Assault 4 Domestic Violence in cause number K89878FV in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

In February 2012, David Iannotti represented N.B. at a jury trial Court for one count of Driving Under the Influence in cause number 1Z0699855. The prosecution alleged that the defendant was recklessly driving in a Safeway parking lot by speeding, doing donuts and losing traction. The prosecution alleged that N.B. refused the breath test. Two citizen witnesses and three police officers testified for the prosecution. Only the defendant testified on his behalf. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Sara Watson

In February 2012, Sara Watson, represented E.W. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree- Domestic Violence. The case involved a dispute between the defendant’s new girlfriend and the defendant’s former girlfriend. The city alleged that the two women began physically fighting when the defendant intervened and placed the alleged victim in a headlock and began punching her in the side. The prosecution’s evidence consisted of testimony from the alleged victim, the alleged victim’s 12 yr-old son, one of the investigating officers, and photographs showing injuries to the alleged victim. The defense argued that the alleged victim was the primary aggressor, that alleged victim’s version of the struggle was inconsistent with the allegations of assault and that the defendant only pulled the women apart to prevent injury to his current girlfriend. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Sara Watson

In January 2012, Sara Watson represented T.R. at a jury trial on one count of Possession of Marijuana and one count of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia in Municipal Court. T.R. was accused of having a flake of marijuana found on the floorboard of his vehicle, as well as straws and foil used to inhale narcotics allegedly located in various places of his vehicle. The prosecution’s evidence consisted of the items found in the vehicle, testimony from the investigating officer (a drug recognition expert), and a blood test showing the defendant to have had marijuana in his system. The defense argued that the defendant did not knowingly possess the items found in his vehicle. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty to both charges.

Ken Harmell

In January 2012 Ken Harmell represented M.B. at a jury trial on one count of Driving With License Suspended in cause number K81945 in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict on Not Guilty.

David Iannotti

In January 2012 David Iannotti represented D.H. at a jury trial on one count of Tampering with the Property of Another in cause number K82014. The city alleged that DH threw large quantities of dirt onto his neighbors lawn during a dispute involving the death of the neighbors cat. The city had also charged DH with Assault and Violation of a Civil Anti-Harassment Order. The City’s witnesses included two civilian witnesses and two police officers. The Tampering with Property case went to trial first. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. The City dismissed the Assault and Order violation charges after the Not Guilty result.

In December 2011, Sara Watson represented N.K. at a jury trial on one count of Reckless Driving in Municipal Court. N.K. was accused of driving in excess of the speed limits, fishtailing, and cutting off other drivers. The prosecutor’s evidence consisted entirely of the investigating officer’s testimony. After the prosecution rested its case, the defense argued for a dismissal arguing that the City had failed to establish a prima facie case. The judge agreed and the case was Dismissed.

In December 2011, Rob Jensen represented J.C.C. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree in cause number 1Z503787. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In December 2011, Andrea Beall represented C.B.M. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree in cause number 11L1347 in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty.

In December 2011, Sara Watson represented K.B. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree-Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. K.B. was accused of punching his wife in the face. The City’s evidence consisted of testimony from the alleged victim, the alleged victim’s daughter, the investigating officers, the 911-call, and photographs showing a hematoma around the alleged victim’s eye. The defense argued that the defendant had acted in self-defense and that the alleged victim was the primary aggressor. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In November 2011, Sam Oh represented J.H. at a jury trial on one count of Possession of a Concealed Weapon Without a Permit in cause number 35854. The prosecution alleged that the defendant came to court with his school backpack, and that a gun was found inside the bag. The defendant denied knowing that the gun was in the bag, claiming that it had been packed by his girlfriend when they went on a hunting/camping trip the prior week. The court granted a defense motion to dismiss at the conclusion of the prosecution’s case.

In November 2011, Rob Jensen represented M.W. at a jury trial on one count of Criminal Trespass in the First Degree in cause number 35842. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In November 2011, Sam Oh represented Joseph Hines at a jury trial on one count of a Concealed Weapons Violation in cause number 35854. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In November 2011, Kristin Fay represented N.H. at a jury trial on one count of DUI and one count of Hit and Run Attended in cause number 11L511 in Municipal Court. The defense argued that there was insufficient evidence to support that the defendant was aware the officer’s vehicle was hit. The defense further argued that the BAC reading was not reliable. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on the charge of Hit and Run. The City dismissed the DUI after a hung jury on the original trial for DUI.

In October 2011, Rob Jensen represented A.H. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree in cause number XY443053. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2011, David Iannotti represented C.T. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number XY241832. CT was accused of assaulting his teen daughter by shoving her to the ground and hitting her several times. The city presented evidence of the assault through testimony of CT’s daughter, wife and the reporting Police Officer. The City also had pictures of the injuries. Mr. Turner testified on his own behalf claiming that his actions were done in self defense and in reasonable discipline of a child. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2011, Rob Jensen represented M.O. at a jury trial on one count of Driving Under the Influence, one count of Obstructing a Public Servant and one count of Resisting Arrest in cause numbers 165256 and 165257. The jury returned a verdicts of Not Guilty on the Driving Under the Influence and Obstructing a Public Servant charges, and the Resisting Arrest charge was dismissed.

In September 2011, Ken Harmell represented M.E.M. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number 11U85 in Municipal Court. The case was dismissed after the jury was empanelled.

In September 2011, Kristin Fay represented L.C. at a jury trial on one count of Disorderly Conduct in cause number 11L597 in Municipal Court. The defense argued that the actions of LC were insufficient to constitute a crime. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2011, Sara Watson represented M.W. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that the defendant punched his employer in the face. The prosecution’s evidence consisted of the alleged victim, a fellow employee, the police officer who responded to the 911 call and photographs showing the injuries to the victim. The defense asserted that the defendant had acted in self-defense and that the alleged victim was the primary aggressor. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2011, Sara Watson represented J.I. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number 11L733 in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2011, Scott Stewart represented G.U at a jury trial on one count of felony Assault in the Second Degree, and one count of felony Assault in the Third Degree, with a lesser included of Assault in the Fourth Degree. The prosecution alleged that G.U. punched two separate victims using brass knuckles at a restaurant. One of the two alleged victims sustained significant injuries to his jaw, as well as facial lacerations. It was the defense position that any actions by G.U. were strictly self defense. The entire incident was videotaped. However, the tape was not preserved by the restaurant owner. Witnesses for the prosecution included the two alleged victims, one of their friends who was with them at he restaurant, the emergency room doctor, and two investigating police officers, including one officer who had viewed the videotape and testified regarding the alleged assault depicted therein. The defense witnesses included the defendant, and one other patron of the restaurant. As part of its defense, the defense noted multiple inconsistencies in the prosecutions case, as well as areas where the police investigation was lacking. After a week long trial the jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on the Assault Three and Not Guilty on the Assault Four. The jury hung eleven to one, with eleven jurors voting to acquit on the Assault Two. The Assault Two was ultimately dismissed on an agreed defense motion, "in the interest of justice."

In July 2011, Andrea Beall represented M.K. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number 11L549 in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2011, Sara Watson represented J.W. at a jury trial on one count of Reckless Driving/Racing in Municipal Court. The arresting officer testified that the defendant raced with another vehicle that had been stopped at the same traffic light. The arresting officer testified that the two cars accelerated at a high rate of speed, were side by side, and could be heard repeatedly shifting gears. The defense argued that the defendant’s behavior was consistent the normal operation of a manual transmission vehicle. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2011, Kristin Fay represented K.L. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number 11U43 in Municipal Court. The City presented testimony from officers and 911 recordings. At the conclusion of the prosecution’s case the judge directed a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In July 2011, Sara Watson, represented J.I. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree- Domestic Violence. The case involved a custody dispute between the defendant and his ex-girlfriend. The parties involved had met at a park for a play-date. The city alleged that J.I. physically restrained his ex-girlfriend so that his wife could maintain physical custody of his daughter. The prosecution’s evidence consisted of testimony from the alleged victim, testimony from two officers that responded to the 911 call, and photographs showing the injuries to the alleged victim. The defense argued that the alleged victim’s version of the event was inconsistent with the allegations of assault and that the defendant’s use of force was lawful for the purposes of preventing injury to his daughter. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2011, David Iannotti represented D.R. at a jury trial on one count of Violating a No Contact Order in cause number XY599676. D.R. was accused of confronting his ex-girlfriend in a bar in violation of a court order. D.R. acknowledged being at the bar but denied contacting his ex-girlfriend. The city had the alleged victim and police officer testify. D.R. and a friend testified that there was no contact and that they were not aware she was at the bar until she was exiting the bar. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In June 2011, Sara Watson represented C.H. at a jury trial on one count of Driving Under the Influence in Municipal Court. The arresting officer testified that C.H.’s vehicle was speeding and weaving in and out of its lane of travel. The arresting officer testified that C.H. had bloodshot, watery eyes, and slurred speech. The officer also testified that C.H. was argumentative and confrontational. C.H. refused to perform field sobriety tests and refused to submit to a breath test. The defense challenged the officer’s conclusion that C.H. was under the influence and emphasized all of the actions taken by C.H. that were consistent with sobriety. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2011, Kristin Fay represented A.S. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number 10L1563 in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2011, Rob Jensen represented M. H. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number XY443053. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2011, Scott Stewart represented A.L. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence in cause number 10L1519. The alleged breath tests were .267 and .266. A.L. had originally been stopped by a law enforcement officer with limited DUI experience. The officer believed that A.L. might be under the influence and requested assistance from an experienced DUI officer. A second officer arrived at the scene and took over the investigation. This officer was a drug recognition expert. After conducting a horizontal gaze nystagmus test, the second officer testified that he believed that A.L. was too drunk to perform additional field sobriety tests. He arrested A.L. and took him to the police station. At the station A.L. submitted to the breath test with the above indicated results of .266/.267. Scott was able to get the expert witness called by the city to testify as to a number of additional tests that could have been performed by the officer to confirm the breath test result. He ultimately argued to the jury that the officer's observations of the defendant were more consistent with the 2 beers that A.L. admitted to having consumed, than the 14 beers indicated by the BAC. During this argument, Scott noted that the jury should not accept the prosecution's position that they should just trust the officer's opinion. He emphasized everything that the defendant had done correctly on the night of the arrest and argued that it raised reasonable doubt. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2011, Rob Jensen represented B.C at a jury trial on one count of Menacing in cause number 35702. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2010 Kristin Fay represented P.F. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Obstructing a Public Servant. The case involved an allegation that her client did not respond fast enough to an officer's demand that he put his hands up. Kristin was able to use the recorded 911 call to argue that the officer did not give him enough time to comply. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2011, Rob Jensen represented B.C. at a jury trial on one count of Menacing in cause number 35702. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2011, Kristin Fay represented A.S. at a jury trial on one count of Criminal Trespass in the Second Degree in cause number 11L104. The defense argued that the officer did not have the authority to trespass the defendant from the listed property and insufficient notice of the trespass. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2011 Kristin Fay represented D.D. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had constructive possession over a pipe that was found in the defendant’s vehicle. The defense argued that the defendant unwittingly possessed the pipe and had no knowledge that it was in his vehicle. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January 2011, Andrea Beall represented J.H. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence in cause number XY00445001. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In December 2010, Andrea Beall represented M.W. at a jury trial on one count of Violation of a Protection Order in cause number XY00103469. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In December 2010, Kristin Fay represented C.B. at a jury trial on one count of Making and Possessing Burglary Tools in cause number 10L1108. The prosecution alleged that “shaved” keys found in the defendant’s pocket were vehicle prowl tools. The defense argued that the city had not established their case and at the conclusion of the prosecution’s case the judge granted a defense motion and directed a verdict of Not Guilty.

In November 2010, Ken Harmell represented S.C. at a jury trial on one count of Animal Cruelty in cause number 10L884. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2010, Andrea Beall represented A.B.W. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence in cause number XY00264132. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2010, Kristin Fay represented J.H. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Obstructing a Public Servant. The prosecution alleged that the defendant failed to comply with an officer’s demand during a drive by shooting investigation. The defense argued that there was an insufficient time for the defendant to comply with the officer’s demands and thus there was no willful non-compliance by the defendant.

In September 2010, Rob Jensen represented E.S. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence in cause number XY55072. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2010, Rob Jensen represented C.F. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree in cause number XY443053. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2010, Andrea Beall represented S.B. at a jury trial on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The case was dismissed after the jury was empanelled.

In August 2010 Sara Watson, Rule 9 Intern, represented V.W. at a jury trial on one count of Harassment in Municipal Court. V.W. was accused of threatening to kill his landlord. The defense argued that in light of the threat made, the alleged victim's reaction was not consistent with a victim being in reasonable fear that the threat would be carried out. After the prosecution rested its case the defense moved for a dismissal arguing that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case. the judge agreed and the case was Dismissed.

In August 2010 Andrea Beall represented M.G. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Reckless Driving / Racing. The prosecution alleged that the defendant was racing another vehicle in an area known for street races at speeds in excess of 70 m.p.h. in a 35 m.p.h. zone. According to the arresting officer, M.G. was driving side by side with the other vehicle, and was in the center turn lane. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2010 Kristin Fay represented J.C. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4 Domestic Violence. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had pushed his elderly mother and punched her in the face. The defense argued that the alleged victim made a false accusation and had ulterior motives in alleging that such an assault had occurred. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2010 David Iannotti represented S.M. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4 Domestic Violence. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had grabbed his wife by the throat two times and choked her during an argument over possessions. The witnesses for the prosecution included the alleged victim and the investigating police officer. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In July 2010, Ken Harmell represented T.E. in Municipal Court on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree - Domestic Violence. T.E. was accused of repeatedly poking his live in girlfriend and repeatedly pushing her causing her to fall and injure her elbow. The prosecution's evidence consisted of the testimony of the alleged victim, the police officer who responded to the 911 call, and photographs showing the injuries to the alleged victim and the lack of injuries to T.E. The defense asserted that the defendant acted in self defense, argued that there were inconsistencies between what the alleged victim testified to and what she told the police officer at the time the incident, and that the behavior of the alleged victims adult children at the time of the incident were more consistent with the alleged victim being the primary aggressor than the defendant. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In July 2010 David Iannotti represented L.K. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Unlawful Bus Conduct. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had played loud music on public transit and when requested to turn it off verbally assaulted other passengers and physically assaulted the bus driver when removed from the bus. The witnesses for the prosecution included the bus driver, a transit officer and the arresting police officer. The defendant and her friend testified on behalf of the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2010 Scott Stewart represented J.M. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on charges of Criminal Trespass. J.M. was accused of being intoxicated and returning to a nightclub's property after having been told that he was trespassed from the property by law enforcement officers. Scott argued that the prosecution failed to establish that the officer's had the authority to trespass J.M. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty..

In June 2010 Andrea Beall represented C.A. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on charges of Malicious Mischief Domestic Violence and Harassment Domestic Violence. C.A. was accused of approaching an ex-girlfriend in a nightclub, threatening her and then going outside and slashing her tires. Witnesses included the alleged victim, her friend who allegedly witnessed the slashing of the sand a police officer. The only witness for the defense was the defendant. At the conclusion of the prosecution's case the defense brought a Motion to Dismiss the Malicious Mischief charge, based upon insufficiency of the evidence. The court granted the defense motion and the charge was Dismissed. The jury then returned a verdict of Not Guilty on the remaining charge of Harassment.

In June 2010 Ken Harmell represented A.Y. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. A.Y. was accused by wis wife of kicking her, slamming her head into the wall, and tying her up with the phone cord. The City's evidence consisted of the testimony of the alleged victim and a police officer, as well as photographs of alleged injuries to the alleged victim's head and legs. The defense argued that it was the alleged victim, and not A.Y. who was the primary aggressor, and introduced the tape of the 911 call made by the accuser to show inconsistencies in her testimony. The defense argued that the victim's injuries were more consistent with her falling and injuring herself while chasing A.Y. then with her version of the incident. Following a two and one-half day trial the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In June 2010 Scott Stewart represented C.C. at a jury trial in District Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. The arresting officer testified that C.C. was observed weaving, including crossing over into the oncoming lane, and that he came to an abrupt stop. When the officer approached C.C.'s window he was on the phone asking that someone come and "pick up his dog" in apparent anticipation of being arrested. C.C. had difficulty getting out of the vehicle, and stumbled as he walked to the front of the vehicle. In the truck the officer located a glass containing a ice and a mixed alcoholic drink. C.C. refused to perform the field sobriety tests. The officer testified that C.C. was argumentative throughout the contact, accusing the officer of stealing large amounts of money, damaging his truck, and being worth less than C.C.'s truck. C.C. ultimately refused to submit to a breath test. As he was being transported to the jail he commented that he was 46 years old and kept "fucking up." The defense successfully challenged the refusal to submit to the field sobriety tests and pointed out all behaviors of C.C. that were consistent with sobriety. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2010, Ken Harmell presented E.W. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on one count of Neglect of a Child. The prosecution alleged that E.W. and her boyfriend acted with criminal negligence when they left their 14 month old child in the care of E.W.'s mother. This because her mother was an alcoholic with a prior history of having gotten drunk, dropping and injuring the child. With regard to the particular incident resulting in the charges, E.W.'s mother had gotten drunk and passed out in a Fred Meyer bathroom with stolen beer and the child in a stroller. The prosecution witnesses included two police officers, a Child Protective Services employee, a firefighter and two store employees. The defense presented evidence that E.W. had acted reasonably as her mother had gone through treatment, been sober for over a year, and had no money with which to purchase alcohol. The defense argued that no one could predict the grandmother would relapse and place the child at risk. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In March 2010, Sara Watson, Rule 9 Intern, represented F.C. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree. The case involved a circumstance that occurred at a bar where the city alleged that F.C. grabbed a woman inappropriately, was confronted by another woman and that he responded by slapping her. The defense alleged that it was a matter of misidentification. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. This was Sara's first jury trial. She was supervised at trial by attorney Andrea Beall.

In March 2010, Rob Jensen represented G.W. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree. The case involved two men who belonged to the same organization who had a falling out. The city alleged that the G.W. had punched the victim without provocation, the defense alleged that the punch was in self defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In March 2010, Ken Harmell, represented S.B. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The city alleged that the defendant kicked the victim, hit her with an object and grabbed her hard enough to leave bruises. The city witnesses included the alleged victim and two officers. They also introduced photographs and a Smith Affidavit. The defense denied two of the allegations and alleged self-defense on the third. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2010, David Iannotti represented N.M. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Telephone Harassment. The city alleged that the defendant had called his family members several times and threatened to come back with a gun and kill everyone. The witnesses for the city included the alleged victim and two investigating police officers. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2010, Rob Jensen represented B.F. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had assaulted a neighbor. The defense argued that any assault was self-defense. Witnesses for the city included the officer and alleged victim. The defense called the the defendant, his girlfriend, and the president of the homeowners association. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty after only 18 minutes of deliberations. 

In February 2010, Scott Stewart represented D.S. at a jury trial in Superior Court on charges of Attempted Rape and Assault with a Deadly Weapon. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had attempted to rape his girlfriend and that, when he was prevented from doing so by her mother, he broke a drinking glass, creating a "shank" which he then used to stab her mother. Witnesses for the prosecution included three King County Deputy Sheriffs, an Emergency Medical Technician and the alleged victim. The prosecution also introduced photographs of the crime scene and injuries, as well as the broken glass, a 911 recording and the defendant's torn shirt. The only witness for the defense was the defendant himself. The jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on both the Attempted Rape and Assault with a Deadly Weapon charges, as well as the lesser included charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree.

In January 2010, David Iannotti represented M.T. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree. The city alleged that the defendant had attacked a store clerk punching him in the head and stomach several times. The witnesses for the city included the alleged victim, the investigating police officer and a citizen witness. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January 2010, Ken Harmell represented D.F. in Superior Court on one count of Assault in the Second Degree. The defendant was accused of punching a man outside of a bar fracturing five bones in the man's face. The State introduced testimony from the alleged victim, a mutual friend of the alleged victim and defendant, an acquaintance of the alleged victim who was present during the fight and the Emergency Room doctor. The defense argued that the defendant's actions were done in self- defense. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty and returned a Special Verdict finding that the defense had proven that the defendant acted in Self Defense, resulting in D.F. being entitled to have his attorney's fees paid by the State.

In January 2010, David Iannotti represented F. K. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Violation of Protection Order. The city alleged that the defendant had parked in front of the alleged victim's house and called her three times. The witnesses for the city included the alleged victim and the investigating police officer. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January of 2010 Kristin Fay represented J. F. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The city presented evidence that the alleged victim was burned with a cigarette butt after a heated argument. The defense presented testimony that J.F. did not burn his ex-girlfriend with a cigarette. Additionally, the defense argued that the injury sustained by the alleged victim was not consistent with her testimony. The jury found J.F. Not Guilty.

In January of 2010 Kristin Fay represented S. B. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Harassment. The city alleged that S.B. threatened to "fix" the alleged victim during the course of an argument creating a reasonable fear that the S.B. would carry out that the threat. The defense presented evidence that this was a misunderstanding and S.B. never intended to cause harm to anyone. The jury found S.B. Not Guilty.

In January of 2010 Andrea Beall represented J.S. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree and Resisting Arrest. The city presented evidence that the defendant struck a neighbor multiple times with a cane and that he struggled with the officers when they attempted to arrest him. The jury found J.S. Not Guilty on both counts.

In January 2010 Ken Harmell represented JK on one count of Driving Under the Influence in District Court. The State's witnesses consisted of a State Trooper, a Drug Recognition Expert and a toxicologist. The defendant was stopped for speeding on Interstate 5 by a Washington State Patrol Trooper. During the stop the Trooper smelled the odor of Marijuana. Following a search of the defendant's vehicle which revealed marijuana and a pipe, the defendant performed poorly on the field sobriety tests and was arrested. He was the examined by a Drug Recognition Expert who opined that the defendant was under the influence of Cannabis and was unsafe to drive. The Defendant provided a blood test that showed the presence of THC in his blood. The defense argued that the science of marijuana impairment and driving is inconclusive and that despite the poor performance on the field sobriety tests and the positive blood results that the lack of any bad driving created a reasonable doubt as to whether or no the defendant was under the influence of drugs and the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. Jennifer Stewart had previously had JK's charges of Possession of Marijuana and Possession of Drug Paraphernalia dismissed on legal arguments at a motion's hearing 

In December 2009 Ken Harmell represented T.G. on one count of Indecent Exposure in Municipal Court. T.G. was accused of exposing himself to a couple following an argument over baseball. The City's evidence consisted of two civilian witnesses and one police officer. The Defense argued that the witnesses ability to describe TG's underwear was not proof that he had exposed himself as there were alternative explanations that would explain the knowledge. The defense also argued that there were significant inconsistencies in the two civilian witnesses testimony. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In December of 2009 Kristin Fay represented M.M. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence and Malicious Mischief in the Third Degree. The city alleged that the defendant's sister was assaulted when the M.M. threw a beer can at her, causing a bruise on her forehead. The city also alleged that M.M. kicked his sister's car door causing damage. The defense presented a witness who testified that the two parties were involved in an argument, but that no physical contact was made. Additional testimony was elicited that the car door was not damaged. The jury found M.M. Not Guilty.

In December 2009, David Iannotti represented W.C. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Harassment. The city alleged that the defendant had confronted his neighbor and threatened to kill and blow up his house along with other threats. The witnesses for the city included two civilian witnesses, the alleged victim, who was an ex-police officer, and the investigating police officers. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.  

In November 2009, David Iannotti represented M.G. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree. The city alleged that the defendant had grabbed his wife by her hair and pulled her around. The witnesses for the city included three casino security guards, the alleged victim, two police officers, and the city's victim advocate. The city also had video evidence of the incident. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In November of 2009 Kristin Fay represented A. K. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. According to the City's witnesses A.K. threw his ex-wife against a wall causing injury. The defense presented two witnesses at trial. Both witnesses testified that the alleged victim broke into the home illegally. The defense successfully presented evidence that such force was lawful. The jury found A.K. Not Guilty.

In October 2009, David Iannotti represented R.L. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The city alleged that the defendant had punched the alleged victim several times in the face. The witnesses for the city included three civilian witnesses, the alleged victim and three police officers. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2009, David Iannotti represented J.R. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The city alleged that the defendant had shoved the alleged victim with his belly onto the floor. The witnesses for the city included one civilian witnesses and two police officers. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October of 2009 Kristin Fay represented T. C. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Criminal Trespass. The city alleged that T.C. was illegally on the property of a local sports bar. The defense moved for a directed verdict dismissal based on the city's failure to establish that T.C. was on the property illegally. The court granted the defense's motion.

In October 2009, David Iannotti represented M.E. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The city alleged that the defendant had punched and grabbed the victim several times. The witnesses for the city included the police officer. The judge dismissed the case at half time based on continued arguments that the defendant's 6th Amendment Rights to confront the witness were being violated.

In October of 2009 Kristin Fay represented B. B. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. The city alleged that B.B. was involved in a car accident that occurred because he was driving under the influence of alcohol. B.B. admitted to having consumed alcohol and driving the vehicle. The defense presented evidence that B.B. consumed alcohol only after the accident had occurred, not while driving the vehicle. The jury found B.B. Not Guilty.

In October 2009, David Iannotti represented J.S. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. The city alleged that the defendant had grabbed and pushed his sister several times. The witnesses for the city included two civilian witnesses, the alleged victim and two police officers. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In September of 2009 Ken Harmell represented P.F. in District Court. P.F. was charged with one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence and one count of Attempted Unlawful Imprisonment Domestic Violence. The defendant was accused by his wife of having punched her three times, strangling her to the point where she nearly passed out, and then keeping her from leaving to seek medical treatment. The State evidence consisted of the defendant's wife testimony, the testimony of two police officers, the testimony of the treating medical provider, photographs of injuries, and medical records. The defense argued self defense and the Jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on both counts.  

In September of 2009 Jeff MacNichols represented C.K. at a jury trial in District Court on a second offense charge of Driving Under the Influence. C.K admitted to texting while driving and to consuming two beers. According to the Trooper, C.K. refused the breath test. The defense presented two witnesses at trial. One of the witnesses, a bartender, testified that he served C.K. two beers during lunch. He testified that he knew client was fine to drive. C.K. had turned down Reckless Driving offer prior to trial. The jury found C.K. Not Guilty after only 17 minutes of deliberation.

In August 2009, David Iannotti represented A.A. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Reckless Driving, Failure to Stop and Give Information, and Resisting Arrest . The city alleged that the defendant had sped by two officers in traffic, then failed to stop when the officers began to chase the defendant, which proceeded into an apartment complex. The city also alleged that once the defendant was stopped, he resisted arrest by struggling with the officer and refusing to comply with the officer’s instructions. The defendant was tazed two times by the officers. The witnesses for the city included two police officers. The defendant and two other citizen witnesses testified on behalf of the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2009, David Iannotti represented S.H. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Prostitution Loitering. The city alleged that the defendant had picked up a prostitute and drove to a secluded location. The witnesses for the city included two police officers who testified that when they approached the car the defendant had his pants down and both parties admitted they were engaged in prostitution. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.  
In July 2009, Scott Stewart represented D.W. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on one count of Assault Domestic Violence. The prosecution's witnesses included a law enforcement officer and three civilian witnesses. Scott moved for a directed verdict at the conclusion on the prosecution's evidence and the trial judge dismissed all charges.

In July 2009, Ken Harmell represented P.R. in Municipal Court. P.R. was charged with one count of Obstructing a Public Servant. The City's evidence consisted of a police officer who testified that the defendant refused to leave a bar when instructed to by the police and that the defendant interfered with other officers attempting to arrest another individual. The defendant testified that he was not acting with the intent to hinder or delay the police officer. The defense argued that the officer did not have any lawful authority to order the defendant to leave the bar, and that the City had failed to prove that the defendant's actions knowingly interfered with the officers official duties. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2009, David Iannotti represented M.M. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4 Domestic Violence. The city alleged that the defendant had slammed the door on the alleged victims head. The witnesses for the city included two civilian witnesses and one police officer. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In June 2009, Ken Harmell represented L.C. on two counts of Harassment Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The prosecution introduced the testimony of the alleged victim and the police officer who testified that the defendant had confessed to having made the threats. The defense challenged the credibility of the alleged victim and argued that the government had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the location of where the crime occurred and that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alleged victim reasonably feared the threats would be carried out. The jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on both counts.

In June 2009, David Iannotti represented C.G. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4 Domestic Violence. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had choked, pushed and slammed the alleged victim in a door. The witnesses for the city included two civilian witnesses and a police officer. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In June 2009, David Iannotti represented T.C. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Criminal Trespass. The city alleged that the defendant had entered a house through the back door The witnesses for the city included a citizen witness and officer who saw the defendant in the house and the owner of the house who claimed the defendant did not have lawful authority to enter or remain on the property. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In June 2009, Ken Harmell represented J.P. on two counts of Assault in the Fourth Degree - Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The prosecution's witnesses consisted of four family members who all testified that the defendant had attacked his two step children and the two officers that responded to the scene. The defense argued self defense and the jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on both counts. 

In May 2009, David Iannotti represented J.I. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4 Domestic Violence. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had broken into the house and pushed the alleged victim to the ground breaking her finger. The witnesses for the city included two civilian witnesses and two police officers. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2009, David Iannotti represented R.G. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Harassment. The city alleged that the defendant walked into a bank and threatened to come back with a gun and kill everyone in the bank. The witnesses for the city included four bank tellers and a police officer. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2009, Ken Harmell represented J.S. on one count of Disorderly Conduct in Municipal Court. The prosecution's witnesses consisted of two men who claimed that they were attacked the J.S. , a firefighter who tackled J.S. as he was allegedly about to strike one of the men and the police officer who responded to the scene. The defense argued that the firefighter did not have a complete picture of what occurred and that the defendant was actually acting in self defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In March 2009, Scott Stewart represented M.B. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4. The witnesses for the city included four civilian witnesses and two police officers. M.B. was alleged to have assaulted his elderly father-in-law during an exchange of his child pursuant to a custody agreement. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2009, Jeff MacNichols represented A.M. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault in Municipal Court. A.M. was accused of assaulting another man outside of a club. Multiple witnesses testified against Jeff's client. Reasonable doubt was established by attacking the memories of the witnesses. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2009, David Iannotti represented K.N. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4. The witnesses for the city included two civilian witnesses and a police officer. The defendant was the only witness for the defense. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2009, Autumn Liner-Sanders represented R.H. at a jury trial in Muncipal Court on charges of Harassment Domestic Violence, Assault Domestic Violence, and Harassment. The Harassment Charge was Dismissed at the conclusion of the case. The jury returned verdict of Not Guilty on both Domestic Violence charges.

In January 2009, David Iannotti represented C.J. at a jury trial on a charge of Reckless Driving in Municipal Court. C.J. was accused of losing traction while accelerating through traffic at a high rate of speed. A city police officer testified for the government. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January 2009, Ken Harmell represented J.C. at a jury trial on charges of Reckless Driving, Failure to Stop and Give Information and Refusal to Comply in Municipal Court. The prosecutor's offer prior to trial would have required a plea to the Reckless Driving, with an agreed 30 days in jail. Furthermore, given J.C.'s criminal record the plea would have resulted in him being labeled an Habitual Traffic Offender (HTO). As such, the case proceeded to trial. At the conclusion of the prosecution case the court Dismissed the Refusal to Comply charge. The jury then convicted on the Failure to Stop charge, but returned a verdict of Not Guilty on the Reckless Driving charge. The court sentenced J.C. to ten days, and he avoided the HTO ramifications.

In November 2008, Jeff Mackie represented M.G. at a jury trial on a charge of Driving With License Suspended in the Second Degree in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In November 2008, Jeff Mackie represented S.S. at a jury trial on a charge of Driving With License Suspended in the First Degree, Assault, Malicious Mischief and Harassment. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on all counts.

In November 2008, David Iannotti represented D.P. at a jury trial on a charge of Loitering for Prostitution in Municipal Court. TD.P. was accused of remaining in an area of prostitution with the intent of committing the crime of prostitution. A police officer produced evidence of online posts on the Seattle area's Craigslist. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2008, Rule 9 Intern Chris Kattenhorn represented K.M. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault 4 Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2008, Jeff Mackie represented P.P. on two counts of Violation of a Protection Order in Municipal Court. The government witnesses included a civilian and two officers. The jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on both counts.

In October 2008, David Iannotti represented M.S. at a jury trial on two counts of Assault 4 Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. M.S. was accused of assaulting his ex-girlfriend by shoving and choking her with his forearm. Witnesses for the city included his ex-girlfriend and her father. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on both counts.

In August 2008, Andrea Beall represented T.O. at a jury trial on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. The officer alleged that M.B. had been stopped after swerving into the oncoming lane and then admitted consuming alcohol. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In August 2008, Jeff Mackie represented F.H. at a jury trial on charges of Assault 4 Domestic Violence, Malicious Mischief Domestic Violence and Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer in Municipal Court. The Jury convicted on the Obstructing charge but returned a verdict of Not Guilty on both Domestic Violence charges.

In August 2008, Jeff Mackie and Rule 9 Intern Chris Kattenhorn represented K.S. on charges of Assault 4 and Harassment in Municipal Court. The city's witnesses included a civilian and three officers. The jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on all counts.

In August 2008, Jeff MacNichols represented L.D. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault 4. The city witnesses included two civilians and an officer. The only witness for the defense was the defendant. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In August 2008, Autumn Liner-Sanders represented J.W. at a jury trial on charges of Driving Under the Influence, Hit and Run Unattended and Reckless Endangerment in Municipal Court. The case was Dismissed following a defense motion at the conclusion of the prosecution's case.

In August 2008, Jeff Mackie represented Z.H. at a jury trial on charge of Driving Under the Influence in Municipal Court. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2008, Jeff MacNichols and Rule Nine Intern Kristin Fay represented J.B. on a charge of Violation of a No Contact Order in Municipal Court. The city presented three civilian witnesses and one police officer. The only witness for the defense was the defendant. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2008, Jeff Mackie represented R.S. at a jury trial on charges of Assault 4 Domestic Violence and Malicious Mischief Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The case was Dismissed on a defense motion after the jury was empanelled.

In July 2008, Ken Harmell represented R.W. at a jury trial on charges of Felony Malicious Mischief Domestic Violence and Assault Domestic Violence in Superior Court. The case was significant enough to the government that the prosecution flew in a witness from out of state to testify on behalf of ts case. Witnesses included the alleged victim, her mother-in-law, a deputy sheriff, a detective, R.W., his father, and his employer. After a three and one half day jury trial the jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on all counts.

In July 2008, Scott Stewart represented J.T. at a jury trial on a count of Assault Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The witnesses included the alleged victim, her sister and two investigating police officers. After the prosecution rested its case on the second day of trial, Scott moved for a dismissal on the grounds that no reasonable jury would be able to convict J.T. The court grated Scott's motion and the case was Dismissed.

In June 2008, David Ionnatti represented B.J. at a jury trial on a count of Assault Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The alleged victim was B.J.'s sixteen year old daughter. Witnesses included the daughter, the daughter's father (B.J.'s ex-husband) and a police officer. Mr. Iannotti argued both self-defense and reasonable discipline of a child. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty, making David undefeated in jury trials so far this year.

In June 2008, Ken Harmell represented L.C. at a jury trial on a charge of Driving Under the Influence in Municipal Court. L.C. was stopped for speeding and had an open container in the vehicle. After taking the field sobriety tests and refusing a portable breath test at the scene he was arrested and taken to the police station where he refused the breath test. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2008, David Iannotti represented F.A. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The defendant was accused of assaulting his wife. Two police officers, the alleged victim's son, the alleged victim and the defendant testified. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2008, David Iannotti represented C.D. at a jury trial on charge of Assault Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. C.D. was accused of assaulting his girlfriend. The incident allegedly occurred in the presence of the victim's mother who testified in support of the government's case. The jury found C.D. Not Guilty.

In April 2008, Ken Harmell represented J.S. at a jury trial on charges of Assault Domestic Violence and Interfering with the Reporting of a Domestic Violence Incident in Municipal Court. J.S. was accused of punching and kicking his wife. At the conclusion of the prosecutor's case Mr. Harmell argued that the government had failed to present sufficient evidence to support the factual allegations in the legal Complaint that had filed against J.S. The court agreed and granted Mr. Harmell's motion to Dismiss.

In March 2008, Ken Harmell represented C.B. at a jury trial on an Assault Domestic Violence charge in Municipal Court. C.B was accused of assaulting the mother of his child in the presence of her sister. He denied the allegation. The jury found C.B. Not Guilty.

In February 2008, David Iannotti represented S.T. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on charges of Assault Domestic Violence, Malicious Mischief Domestic Violence and Harassment Domestic Violence arising out of two separate incidents. The Government alleged that S.T. assaulted his roommate, smashed a hole in the wall and threatened his roommate to drop the case "or else." The jury returns a verdict of Not Guilty to all three counts.

In February 2008, Ken Harmell represented J.H. at a jury trial on Assault Domestic Violence and Interfering with the Reporting of Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. J.H. was accused of assaulting her mother in law. She argued that she acted in self defense. The jury found J.H Not Guilty of both counts.

In February 2008, Jeff MacNichols represented M.C. in at a jury trial in Municipal Court on charges of Racing and Reckless Driving. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January 2008, Ken Harmell represented M.B. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. The jury was unable to reach a verdict resulting in a hung jury.

January 2008, Scott Stewart represented T.H. at a jury trial on a Reckless Driving charge in Municipal Court. T.H. was accused of driving his motorcycle at speeds of 100 miles per hour and popping a wheelie, resulting in a major traffic accident. The jury found T.H. Not Guilty. T.H. later retained Scott on a personal injury accident arising out of the same accident. In January 2010, Scott settled the claim on behalf of T.H. for $75,000.00.

January 2008, Ken Harmell represented D.M. at a jury trial on an Assault Domestic Violence charge in Municipal Court. D.M. was alleged to have assaulted her husband in the presence of their child. D.M. denied the allegation and claimed that she had in fact been assaulted by her husband. The jury found D.M. Not Guilty.

In December 2007, Ken Harmell represented D.W. at a jury trial on charges of Assault Domestic Violence, Violation of a No Contact Order, and Interfering with the Reporting of Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. D.W. was accused of assaulting his daughter and preventing her from calling the police, while his wife was present in violation of a no contact order. The defendant denied the allegations. The jury found the D.W. Not Guilty of all charges.

In October 2007, Ken Harmell represented R.H. at a jury trial on a Harassment Domestic Violence charge in the Municipal Court. The Defendant's father claimed that the defendant threatened to shoot him in the head. The defense argued that the alleged victim fabricated the charges to discredit R.H. who was a potential witness against the father in an unrelated matter. The jury found the R.H. Not Guilty.

In August 2007, Andrea Beall represented E.M.at a jury trial on a charge of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer in Municipal Court. The incident occurred at a Transit Station in Pierce County. The government alleged that E.M. physically interfered with the police investigation of a Robbery. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2007, Jeff MacNichols represented Z.C. at a jury trial in District Court on charges of Assault Domestic Violence and Assault on a Police Officer. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2007, Jeff MacNichols represented M.M. on a charge of Driving Under the Influence in Municipal Court. M.M. had allegedly refused the breath test. The police officer accused him of excessive speed, failing the field sobriety tests, and admitting to consuming alcohol. Client was facing his second DUI. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In July 2007, Jeff MacNichols represented E.G. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In June 2007, Jennifer Stewart represented C.S.at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Physical Control of a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence. The defendant was found allegedly under the influence in a running vehicle parked in a business lot. Ms. Stewart asserted the affirmative defense of safely off the roadway. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2007, Jeff Mackie represented J.L. at a jury trial on a charge of Aiming or Discharging a Firearm in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2007, Jennifer Stewart represented M.T. at a jury trial on a charge of Harassment in Municipal Court. At the trial the alleged victim and a witness testified that M.T. attacked the victim at a community meeting. A mistrial was declared when the jury was unable to reach a verdict. As a result of the trial the prosecution re-evaluated their case and Dismissed all charges.

In May 2007, Jeff MacNichols represented M.D. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Physical Control While Under the Influence. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2007, Scott Stewart represented M.P. at a jury trial on a charge of Driving Under the Influence in Municipal Court. The Jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In April 2007, Scott Stewart represented T.H. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault Domestic Violence in Municipal Court. The defendant allegedly assaulted his girlfriend in a moving motor vehicle. The court initially denied a defense motion for a Directed Verdict and then for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict. Following the trial the prosecution re-evaluated their case and Dismissed all charges.

In April 2007, Ken Harmell represented E.H. at a jury trial on and Assault Domestic Violence charge in Municipal Court. The defendant was accused of pushing his girlfriend down a flight of stairs. The alleged victim had significant injuries. The defense presented and alibi defense. The jury found the E.H. Not Guilty.

In March 2007, Ken Harmell represented A.A. at a jury trial on charges of Stalking and Assault in Municipal Court. The defendant was accused of Stalking and Assaulting a barista. A.A. denied the allegations. The jury found A.A. Not Guilty.

In March 2007, Ken Harmell represented K.A. at a jury trial on an Assault Domestic Violence charge in Municipal Court. K.A.'s wife, the alleged victim and her daughter claimed that the he had assaulted her in the family home. K.A. argued self defense. The jury found K.A. Not Guilty.

In March 2007, Scott Stewart represented L.A. at a jury trial on a charge of Driving Under the Influence in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2007, Scott Stewart represented Y.I. at a jury trial on a charge of Minor in Possession in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2007, Andrea Beall represented T.W. at a jury trial on charges of Disorderly Conduct and Criminal Trespass in Municipal Court. The judge Dismissed the Criminal Trespass charge at the conclusion of the government's case. The jury found the T.W. Not Guilty of the Disorderly Conduct charge.

In January 2007, Scott Stewart represented F.C. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault Domestic Violence. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January 2007, Jeff MacNichols represented M.A. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Assault Domestic Violence. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January 2007. Jeff Mackie represented O.F. at a jury trial in Municipal Court where the he was charged with Assault arising out of his alleged attack on a neighbor with a rock. The police alleged that he O.F. had admitted to the crime, but at trial he denied the allegations. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In January 2007, Ken Harmell represented D.Z. at a jury trial on a charge of Violation of a Protection Order in Municipal Court. The alleged victim claimed that D.Z. contacted her at court. D.Z. denied the contact, and argued that victim had attempted to initiate contact by looking for him at two different courts. The jury found D.Z. Not Guilty.

In October 2006, Scott Stewart represented G. S. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on one count of Assault 4. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In October 2006, Scott Stewart represented V.D. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on one count of Assault and one count of Assault Domestic Violence. The case was originally brought to trial in January 2005 with a jury verdict of Not Guilty on the Assault charge and Guilty on the Assault Domestic Violence charge. Scott appealed the trial court's denial of a defense motion during the first trial. The appellate court agreed with the defense argument and in March of 2006 remanded the case to the Municipal Court for a retrial on the Assault Domestic Violence charge. Following a second trial in October 2006 the jury found V.D. Not Guilty of the Domestic Violence charge.

In September 2006, Scott Stewart represented E.W. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault in Municipal Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2006, Ken Harmell represented L.M. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Stalking. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In August 2006, Jeff MacNichols represented D.S. at a jury trial in District Court on an Assault charge. D.S. was alleged to have assaulted a store clerk. The jury returned a verdict on Not Guilty.

In June 2006, Scott Stewart represented C.B. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In May 2006, Scott Stewart represented W.H. at a jury trial on a charge of Telephone Harassment in Municipal Court. The government alleged that W.H. had threatened to severely harm the alleged victim in the case. The court granted a defense motion to dismiss at the conclusion of the government's case. The city appealed, but ultimately agreed to Dismiss the case.

In April 2006, Andrea Beall represented K.J. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Hit and Run. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty. 

In April 2006, Jeff MacNichols represented J.T. at a jury trial on a charge of Driving Under the Influence in District Court. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In March 2006, Scott Stewart represented J.R. at a jury trial on a charge of Assault in Municipal Court. The government alleged that the defendant had inappropriately touched a young female while in a local store. The entire incident was captured on videotape. The defense denied that any such touching had occurred and disputed the government's interpretation of the video. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In March 2006, Jeff MacNichols represented J.F. at a jury trial in District Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

In February 2006, Scott Stewart represented K.M. at a jury trial on a charge of Stalking in Municipal Court. The government alleged that K.M. had stalked a female attendant at a local mini mart. The defense denied the allegation, instead arguing that M.G. was simply a friendly, regular customer of the store. The court granted a defense motion for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the government's case. The government appealed the court's ruling, but ultimately agreed to Dismiss the case.

More Examples of SBMH Jury Trial Victories 

The attorneys at Stewart MacNichols Harmell, Inc., P.S., have been winning jury trials for over twenty years. Some of our other jury trial victories include the following:

Scott Stewart represented H.D.F. at a jury trial in Municipal Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. The arresting officer alleged that H.D.F. was extremely intoxicated and had driven his motor vehicle onto local railroad tracks. H.D.F. had a breath alcohol content of .22 as registered on the breath test. During the trial the prosecutor called an expert witness from the Washington State Patrol's Breath Test Division who testified as to accuracy of the .22 breath test reading. In cross examining both the officer and breath test expert Scott challenged the results, noting that they were inconsistent with H.D.F.'s performance on the field tests, the officer's other observations, and H.D.F.'s statements regarding the amount of alcohol that he had consumed. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Four months after passing the bar Ken Harmell represented A.B. at a jury trial in Superior Court on two counts of Delivery of Cocaine, one count of Possession of Cocaine with intent to Deliver, and one count of Possession of Heroin with Intent to Deliver. All four charges carried school enhancements. The case involved two sales of cocaine to a confidential informant, paid by the police. Heroin was found following the issuance of a search warrant. A.B. was facing a 122 - 144 months standard range sentence, plus eight consecutive years for the school enhancements, for a total of eighteen to twenty years in prison. The Heroin charge was dismissed at the conclusion of the prosecution's case. A.B. was found Not Guilty of both counts of Delivery of Cocaine, Not Guilty of Possession of Cocaine with Intent to Deliver, and Guilty of the lesser included offense of Simple Possession of Cocaine. He was released with credit for time served.

Scott Stewart represented S.C., a law enforcement officer enforcement officer, at a jury trial in District Court. S.C. was charged with two counts of Assault Domestic Violence and one count of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer. The prosecution witnesses included officers with the investigating law enforcement agency including a major, a sergeant, two detectives, three officers, the alleged victim and an additional witness. The jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on all three counts. The trial was covered by local media. An article on the jury verdict appears in the Seattle Post Intelligencer on December 10, 2005.

Ken Harmell represented C.L. on a charge of Manufacturing Methamphetamines in Superior Court. During the trial Mr. Harmell discovered that the lead detective for the state had violated pretrial court orders. The court found that the violations had occurred and allowed him to recall the officer to question her as to her behavior. The defendant was facing an additional ten years in prison. Based upon the court's ruling, the prosecution offered the defense a new disposition resulting in a plea to a lesser charge with concurrent prison time to what he was facing in another County.

Jeff MacNichols represented L.S. at a jury trial in Superior Court on charges of Possession of Cocaine with Intent to Deliver, Witness Tampering and Bail Jumping. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on all three counts.

Ken Harmell represented D.G. at a jury trial in Superior Court on a charge of felony Malicious Mischief in the 2nd Degree. The state alleged that the defendant used a metal pole to maliciously damage a neighbor's car during an altercation. Ken argued that D.G. damaged the vehicle while defending himself, and that it was not a malicious act. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Ken Harmell represented R.D. on a felony Assault Domestic Violence in Superior Court. R.D. was alleged to have beaten his girlfriend with a belt and striking her in the head with an ashtray. The defense argued a general denial and the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Scott Stewart represented H.N. on a charge of Physical Control While Under the Influence of Alcohol in Municipal Court. The police testified that H.N. was sitting in the driver's seat of a running vehicle that was parked in a dangerous manner on a road in a residential neighborhood. Scott presented the affirmative defense of safely off the roadway, and argued that there was no evidence that the officers had moved the supposedly dangerously parked vehicle after H.N. was arrested. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

M.W. was convicted following a jury trial of a felony Violation of a No Contact Order and Assault 4 Domestic Violence. Ken Harmell brought a motion for a new trial based upon an error in the jury instructions. The trial judge granted the defense motion as to the No Contact Order. At M.W.'s second trial Ken argued that there had been no Assault in Violation of the No Contact Order. The defendant was convicted only of the lesser included misdemeanor violation of the order, and not the Felony, saving M.W. from serving a prison sentence on these charges.

Examples of SBMH Motions Practice Victories

The attorneys at Stewart MacNichols Harmell, Inc., P.S., have been winning motions that resulted in the dismissal of cases and/or suppression of significant evidence for over fifteen years. Some of our recent motions practice victories include the following:

In April 2012 Ken Harmell represented A.P. on one count of DUI. A.P. was accused of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of Alcohol with a BAC greater than .20 within two hours of driving. The defense argued that the officer lacked probable cause to stop the defendant and that the basis the officer articulated for pulling over the defendant was a pretext and therefore unconstitutional. On cross examination the officer admitted that he pulled the defendant over based on an assertion that the defendant had littered even though the officer had not witnessed the littering. The officer further admitted that he had no authority to issue a citation for littering that was not observed by law enforcement. Based on the testimony the court found the stop unconstitutional and the case was dismissed. 

In September 2009 Scott Stewart represented I.S. in Municipal Court on a charge of Being in Physical Control of a Motor Vehicle While Under the Influence. I.S. had been arrested after a citizen advised the police that he was going to drive even though he appeared to be drunk. At the police station I.S. took the breath test with results of a .19 and .20. Scott initially challenged the Department of Licensing's intent to administratively suspend his driver's license, and was successful in getting the DOL action dismissed. On the criminal matter Scott filed a motion to suppress all evidence and dismiss, arguing that the the officer's stop, based entirely on information from an informant, was unreliable. After reviewing the motion, the prosecution elected not to proceed with the case, instead stipulating to dismiss the charge.

In September 2009 Jeff MacNichols represented M.A. in District Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. M.A. had been arrested in 2003. His breath test was a .19. In 2003 Jeff won the Department of Licensing hearing, and the DOL action to suspend M.A.'s license was dismissed. M.A. received no notice from the court regarding the DUI and assumed that the case had been dropped. Six years later, in 2009, M.A. was stopped at the airport and advised of a warrant for his arrest arising out of the 2003 DUI stop. He cleared the warrant. Jeff MacNichols quickly determined that original summons mailed by the court had been sent to the wrong address. M.A. had moved and advised the DOL of his new address, but the court had, nonetheless, mailed his hearing notice to his prior address. The court granted Jeff's motion to dismiss based upon a violation of M.A.'s right to a speedy trial.

In August 2009 Jeff MacNichols represented L.C. in District Court on a charge of Driving Under the Influence. At a motion hearing the prosecution's law enforcement "drug recognition expert" gave an opinion that at the time that he drove L.C. was under the influence of marijuana. A Blood sample showed the presence of marijuana in L.C.'s blood. At the hearing Jeff successfully argued that marijuana in L.C.'s blood was from prior use (metabolite) and that State could not prove that L.C. was affected by his use on night in question. The judge agreed and ordered dismissal of the case.

Disclaimer: This information is not intended as legal advice or as a guarantee of the outcome of any future case. This is because every case has unique facts, and no one can ever guarantee results. Furthermore, this information does not establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken

Share by: