Friday, November 21, 2008
Trooper Gannon - delay in writing reports
Recently I had a case with Trooper Joe Gannon out of Redmond in which the date of his police report was nearly a month after the date of the arrest. A public disclosure request for all his arrest reports for that time period revealed some interesting results. As it turned out Trooper Gannon had arrested 18 other people and many of their reports before he got around to writing up my client. This proved useful when he started remembering details at a motion which were not in his report. In any case in which Trooper Gannon delays the writing of his report, a PDR could be very helpful.
How to Join and Post
To join WADIB and share information with others that can help our clients' cases, please send an e-mail to Joshua Schaer at joshua@eganattorney.com, and you will then receive an invitation to become an eligible member.
You may also need a Google account, which involves providing your e-mail and creating a password.
We can have up to 100 members.
You may also need a Google account, which involves providing your e-mail and creating a password.
We can have up to 100 members.
Sgt. Klein - Shoreline
In a motion hearing 7/19/07 (pm) in Shoreline courtroom #1, Sgt. Paul Klein testified that he watched a car pull out of Parker's casino, the car turned into the lane furthest from the curb, and Klein followed it until it entered a motel parking lot; he then made a "traffic stop." Klein stated that when he's on patrol, "everyone could be a DUI," and he doesn't "normally pull someone over for a wide turn." He also said he approached the car to "be nosy," and "see if there was anything criminal going on."
(In a different case a few months later, Sgt. Klein watched someone drive into a parking lot because he suspected DUI, and waited for the person to park and exit the car before making contact - since there was no basis for a traffic stop, Klein decided to let the person become a pedestrian so he could question him under a lesser standard. Be aware of this "trick.")
After initially denying the 3.6, Judge Smith later granted a motion for reconsideration based on pretext and dismissed. The testimony may be helpful to you in other cases involving this officer.
(In a different case a few months later, Sgt. Klein watched someone drive into a parking lot because he suspected DUI, and waited for the person to park and exit the car before making contact - since there was no basis for a traffic stop, Klein decided to let the person become a pedestrian so he could question him under a lesser standard. Be aware of this "trick.")
Officer Cassidy - Redmond
On 5/3/07, according to report 07-007862, Redmond Officer Jason Cassidy made a traffic stop on a vehicle that engaged in an "unsafe lane change." The officer "smelled alcohol" on the driver's breath, and the driver admitted having one beer at a friend's house. The officer had the driver do FSTs and described the performance as "poor completion." The officer "determined [the driver] was affected by alcohol," and arrested the driver.
Despite these significant "observations," at the station, the driver blew .000/.000 on the breath test.
This older information may be helpful to you in future cases with this officer.
Despite these significant "observations," at the station, the driver blew .000/.000 on the breath test.
This older information may be helpful to you in future cases with this officer.
Trooper Rider - WSP
In an incident occurring 2/14/07, report C662107, Trooper Leonard Rider (#673) wrote that he stopped a vehicle for extreme speeding from 85th St. in Kirkland onto I-405. The driver had "bloodshot and watery eyes," and the Trooper "immediately observed the odor of intoxicants coming from inside the vehicle." The driver refused FSTs. The driver was arrested for DUI.
Despite the Trooper's strong observations and conclusion to arrest for DUI, the driver blew .000/.000 at the station.
While this is an older case, the information may be helpful for future impeachment should you have this Trooper arrest your client and claim similar "observations."
Despite the Trooper's strong observations and conclusion to arrest for DUI, the driver blew .000/.000 at the station.
While this is an older case, the information may be helpful for future impeachment should you have this Trooper arrest your client and claim similar "observations."
DOL Appeal - King and Pierce Co. Superior Cts.
For those of you in King Co.: Judge Kallas is taking over hearing RALJ appeals, including DOL matters. This is a welcome change from Judge Erlick, who ruled that Hearing Examiners can give whatever weight they want to breath test evidence, despite overwhleming evidence of protocol violations and misconduct. Judge Barnett, on the other hand, did rule favorably on this issue at a stay hearing (after an affidavit moved the case).
For those of you in Pierce Co.: Today, Judge Orlando ruled against a DOL RALJ appeal based on the Chromatograph 1 issue; he also ruled that Hearing Examiners can give whatever "weight" and "credibility" to BACs that they want. The argument, however, had nothing to do with the evidence's weight or ER 702 - it was strictly limited to foundational admissibility and 46.61.506(3). Nonetheless, he mentioned that he was ruling consistently with another case from a few weeks earlier. He also refused to find irreparable harm, although client had a CDL and lost his job due to the suspension. If your stay hearing is in Pierce Co., be advised to consider an affidavit.
For those of you in Pierce Co.: Today, Judge Orlando ruled against a DOL RALJ appeal based on the Chromatograph 1 issue; he also ruled that Hearing Examiners can give whatever "weight" and "credibility" to BACs that they want. The argument, however, had nothing to do with the evidence's weight or ER 702 - it was strictly limited to foundational admissibility and 46.61.506(3). Nonetheless, he mentioned that he was ruling consistently with another case from a few weeks earlier. He also refused to find irreparable harm, although client had a CDL and lost his job due to the suspension. If your stay hearing is in Pierce Co., be advised to consider an affidavit.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
King County District Court BACs
The King County District Court is still suppressing all BAC test results based on the problems at the State Toxicology Lab. Most judges will sign orders at arraignment, and the State will make its "standard objection." Simply reference the three-judge panel ruling in State v. Ahmach.
Please also remember that Ahmach was a King County District Court case. In your local jurisidction, or with a City case, it likely does not apply. Some prosecutors are still stipulating to not offer the tests, although back-dooring it to improperly justify conditions of release, sentencing, or threatening to use it as rebuttal evidence. Feel free to post any updates on local BAC rulings here at WADIB. For suggestions on how to phrase orders for collateral estoppel purposes, please contact me. That sort of information need not be shared through WADIB.
Please also remember that Ahmach was a King County District Court case. In your local jurisidction, or with a City case, it likely does not apply. Some prosecutors are still stipulating to not offer the tests, although back-dooring it to improperly justify conditions of release, sentencing, or threatening to use it as rebuttal evidence. Feel free to post any updates on local BAC rulings here at WADIB. For suggestions on how to phrase orders for collateral estoppel purposes, please contact me. That sort of information need not be shared through WADIB.
Monday, November 17, 2008
DWLS 3 Based on Unpaid Infraction
If you have a DWLS 3 case where the underlying suspension was based on an unpaid/defaulted traffic infraction, have the case continued until the Supreme Court rules on this "son-of-Redmond v. Moore" issue. Oral argument was 11/18, and a decision could take a few months, but it will be dispositive. If favorable, the DWLS charge may be invalidated for a due process violation.
The case on appeal is Bellevue v. Lee, 81473-2.
The case on appeal is Bellevue v. Lee, 81473-2.
Trooper Barton - Burien
Some helpful statements made under oath:
On 11/3/08, Trooper Barton testified that she last read her NHTSA training manual in Sept. '08, but hadn't "read it front to back." She "did not recall" what NHTSA said about test validity requiring standardized administration. She also stated that she always keeps suspects handcuffed during Miranda at the station, and reads the rights to them, but doesn't let them see the document.
Judge Phillipson denied all defense motions, and found "30 questions" admissible despite client merely saying he understood rights, but not acknowledging a waiver.
Testimony was on 11/3/08, pm, in Burien court #2.
On 11/3/08, Trooper Barton testified that she last read her NHTSA training manual in Sept. '08, but hadn't "read it front to back." She "did not recall" what NHTSA said about test validity requiring standardized administration. She also stated that she always keeps suspects handcuffed during Miranda at the station, and reads the rights to them, but doesn't let them see the document.
Judge Phillipson denied all defense motions, and found "30 questions" admissible despite client merely saying he understood rights, but not acknowledging a waiver.
Testimony was on 11/3/08, pm, in Burien court #2.
Welcome Message
Welcome to the WADIB! For too long, prosecutors have had the upper hand in coordinating their knowledge to prepare for motions or trial. With this blog, defense attorneys across Washington State can add information that will assist each other's case strategies and cross-examination.This blog is desgined for sharing information on: 1) officers (e.g. Trooper X says "I always follow people looking for a DUI" or "Officer Z is no longer employed with the WSP; he's moved to California after a brutality complaint") that can then be used in future proceedings as impeachment evidence; 2) court rulings (e.g. "Judge A. has reversed herself and is now limiting HGN to consumption only") so we know what's going on when appearing in unfamiliar territory; and 3) procedural information (e.g. "talk to Mr. J at Costco if you want a compromise of misdemeanor", or "here's the best # for getting a real person at DOL") that will make everyone's practice easier and save time.
For posting purposes, please label your comments in one of the following ways:
* General Information (regarding blog)
* Officers
* Court Rulings
* Procedural Help
Please be specific regarding the particular court, judge, officer, and date/time of hearing (in case someone wants to order the CD record for later use).Please don't use this blog for openly suggesting specific strategies (remember this blog is public), random topics, humorous observations, or pats on the back.
Also, this is not a forum for posting questions to things you don't know (e.g. "what is Judge T. doing on QAPs before 8001?") - go ahead and simply post "Judge T. is suppressing all BACs if the solution is 8001 or earlier." That way, the information is shared and no one has to ask.
The WADIB is strictly a place for information.
For posting purposes, please label your comments in one of the following ways:
* General Information (regarding blog)
* Officers
* Court Rulings
* Procedural Help
Please be specific regarding the particular court, judge, officer, and date/time of hearing (in case someone wants to order the CD record for later use).Please don't use this blog for openly suggesting specific strategies (remember this blog is public), random topics, humorous observations, or pats on the back.
Also, this is not a forum for posting questions to things you don't know (e.g. "what is Judge T. doing on QAPs before 8001?") - go ahead and simply post "Judge T. is suppressing all BACs if the solution is 8001 or earlier." That way, the information is shared and no one has to ask.
The WADIB is strictly a place for information.
Need for Regional WADIB Blogs
This blog was designed for use by all WA defense attorneys. It would probably be advantageous and easier to use if someone set up more regional blogs, such as a WADIB for E. Wash. or a particular county. That would make it take less time to find information.
If anyone would like to set up a King County WADIB blog, or even broaden it to "Puget Sound," please contact me at joshua@eganattorney.com or call (206) 749-0333, so we can coordinate. Thanks.
If anyone would like to set up a King County WADIB blog, or even broaden it to "Puget Sound," please contact me at joshua@eganattorney.com or call (206) 749-0333, so we can coordinate. Thanks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)