Tacoma Criminal Lawyer Blog

Tribunal explica sanciones económicas por delitos de DUI en Tacoma

Published on: August 10, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

Effectivo-215x300 En los casos de DUI de Tacoma, los tribunales suelen imponer multas a las personas condenadas, además de otras sanciones. Sin embargo, en algunos casos, como cuando un acusado es indigente, el Estado y/o la Ciudad pueden acordar renunciar a dichas multas. Si un tribunal impone por error sanciones financieras a un acusado de DUI a pesar de acordar no hacerlo, dichas multas pueden ser anuladas, como se demuestra en una opinión reciente de Washington emitida en un caso de DUI. Si vive en Tacoma y fue acusado de un delito de DUI, puede enfrentar sanciones sustanciales, y es inteligente hablar con un abogado defensor de DUI de Tacoma de confianza para determinar sus derechos.

Antecedentes Procesales del Caso

Se informa que el acusado fue acusado de delito grave de conducir bajo la influencia. Ella se declaró culpable, después de lo cual el tribunal impuso una sentencia en la parte inferior del rango estándar. El tribunal también acordó que renunciaría a todas las obligaciones legales y financieras que no fueran obligatorias, porque el acusado era indigente. Supuestamente, sin embargo, el tribunal determinó que estaba obligado por ley a imponer ciertas tarifas y sanciones por una condena por delito grave de DUI. Como tal, impuso $300 adicionales en multas bajo dos leyes estatales de vehículos motorizados. El demandado apeló, argumentando que las multas fueron impuestas por error.

Court Explains Financial Penalties for Tacoma DUI Crimes

Published on: August 10, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

money-225x300 In Tacoma DUI cases, the courts typically impose fines on convicted persons, in addition to other penalties. However, in some cases, such as when a defendant is indigent, the State and/or City may agree to waive such fines. If a court mistakenly imposes financial penalties on a DUI defendant despite agreeing not to do so, such fines may be stricken, as demonstrated in a recent Washington opinion issued in a DUI case. If you live in Tacoma and were accused of a DUI offense, you may face substantial penalties, and it is smart to speak to a trusted Tacoma DUI defense attorney to determine your rights.

Procedural Background of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with felony driving under the influence. She entered a guilty plea, after which the court imposed a sentence at the bottom of the standard range. The court also agreed that it would waive all legal, financial obligations that were not mandatory, because the defendant was indigent.

Allegedly, though, the court found that it was obligated as a matter of law to impose certain fees and penalties for a conviction for felony DUI. As such, it imposed an additional $300 in fines under two state motor vehicle laws. The defendant appealed, arguing that the fines were imposed in error. Continue reading

Court Explains the Government’s Burden of Proof in Washington Weapons Crime Cases

Published on: August 8, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

antique-gun-199x300 Generally, people in Tacoma have the right to own and possess firearms. The right is not inalienable, however, and in certain situations may be taken away. For example, people convicted of felony offenses are typically barred from possessing firearms, and may face criminal charges if they are caught with a gun in their possession. As with all criminal offenses, to establish the crime of unlawful possession of a firearm the state must prove each element in order to demonstrate the defendant’s guilt. Recently, a Washington court issued a ruling in which it discussed the government’s burden of proof in weapons crime cases. If you are a Tacoma resident and are charged with a weapons crime, it is prudent to confer with a skilled Tacoma weapons charge defense attorney to assess your possible defenses.

History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with two counts of unlawful possession of a firearm and one count of unlawful possession of ammunition in violation of federal law. Prior to trial, the defendant filed numerous motions in limine, asking the court to preclude the government from introducing certain evidence at trial. The parties also presented a proposed stipulation regarding certain elements of the charged offenses. As the specifics of the stipulation were unclear, the court reserved judgment on the issue.

The Government’s Burden of Proof in Weapons Crime Cases

The court explained that the offenses that the defendant was charged with required the government to prove that the defendant was previously convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term that exceeds one year. The defendant indicated that he would stipulate at trial that he had at least one felony conviction that was punishable by imprisonment for more than a year prior to being charged with the subject crimes, however. The government accepted that stipulation and stated it would not attempt to introduce specifics of his felony conviction at trial. Continue reading

¿Cuáles son los sitios en donde poseer armas de fuego es ilegal?

Published on: August 2, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

Union-Station-205x300 El privilegio de poseer una arma para defenderse y defender la familia es un derecho fundamental en los Estados Unidos. Sin embargo, hay ciertos lugares en que tener una arma es una violación de la ley – puede ser la ley federal o estatal, o los dos.

La ley federal

Bajo la ley federal, es ilegal llevar una arma de fuego en un edificio o sitio federal (enlace en inglés) que es propiedad del gobierno federal y donde trabajan empleados federales. Algunos ejemplos de sitios federales donde se prohíben las armas son el correo, las cortes, y las oficinas de agencias gubernamentales.

Washington Court Discusses Unjust Sentences in Domestic Violence Cases

Published on: August 1, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

Separate-from-kids-300x232 A conviction for a domestic violence crime may not only result in criminal penalties, but it may also negatively impact a person’s relationships. For example, courts may determine that parents guilty of committing domestic violence offenses should be denied access to their children. Courts may only limit parental rights if it is necessary for the protection of children, though, and any order limiting their rights should be narrow in duration and scope. Recently, a Washington court issued an opinion discussing when the courts may impinge on the fundamental right to parent in a domestic violence matter. If you are accused of a crime of domestic violence, it is advisable to meet with a Tacoma domestic violence defense attorney to assess your options for seeking a favorable result.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported the defendant and his wife were married in 2003 and separated in 2016. In 2017, the wife obtained a domestic violence protection order that, in part, limited the defendant’s access to his children. A second order was issued prohibiting him from seeing the children, but his wife continued to allow him access to them despite the order. In 2018, the defendant became angry the wife was dating someone and entered her home without his permission.

Allegedly, once he was inside the home, he assaulted his wife and threatened to kill her. He was charged with and convicted of numerous domestic violence offenses. The sentencing court entered a lifetime no-contact order protecting the children. The defendant appealed. Continue reading

Tribunal de Washington Explica Evidencia Suficiente Para Establecer Identidad En Casos Penales

Published on: July 21, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

En materia penal, la carga de la prueba recae únicamente en la acusación. En otras palabras, la acusación debe ofrecer pruebas suficientes para establecer no solo que se cometió un delito, sino también que el acusado es la persona que cometió el delito imputado. Si la fiscalía no puede cumplir con su carga de la prueba, el acusado no debe ser condenado. Esto se explicó recientemente en un fallo en el que un tribunal de Washington revocó la condena por agresión de un acusado con el argumento de que la fiscalía no cumplió con su carga de la prueba. Si lo acusaron de un delito de agresión, es aconsejable reunirse con un abogado defensor de agresión de Tacoma capacitado para evaluar qué evidencia puede presentar el Estadoen el juicio.

Los Hechos Del Caso

Se alega que la policía de Tacoma respondió a una llamada al 911 informando sobre violencia doméstica. Durante la llamada, la víctima identificó a su presunto agresor por su nombre. Luego, el Estado acusó al acusado de múltiples cargos de agresión con agravantes de violencia doméstica. La víctima no compareció en el juicio, a pesar de que los fiscales emitieron una orden para obligarla a comparecer. El Estado juzgó el caso sin el testimonio de la víctima. Según se informa, durante el juicio, el acusado se presentó por su nombre y el oficial que respondió a la llamada al 911 testificó que la víctima identificó a su atacante y que la persona a la que nombró tenía el mismo nombre que el acusado. El jurado finalmente condenó al acusado, quien apeló, argumentando que el Estado no presentó pruebas suficientes para establecer que él era el agresor de la víctima. Continue reading

Washington Court Explains Evidence Sufficient to Establish Identity in Criminal Cases

Published on: July 18, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

Identity-194x300 In criminal matters, the burden of proof rests solely with the prosecution. In other words, the prosecution must offer evidence sufficient to establish not only that a crime was committed but also that the defendant is the person that committed the charged offense. If the prosecution is unable to meet its burden of proof, the defendant should not be convicted. This was explained recently in a ruling in which a Washington court reversed a defendant’s assault conviction on the grounds that the prosecution failed to meet its burden of proof. If you were charged with an assault offense, it is wise to meet with a capable Tacoma assault defense attorney to evaluate what evidence the State may introduce at trial.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that Tacoma police responded to a 911 call reporting domestic violence. During the call, the victim identified her alleged attacker by name. The State then charged the defendant with multiple counts of assault with domestic violence aggravators. The victim failed to appear at trial, despite the fact that prosecutors issued a warrant to compel her to appear. The State tried the case without the victim’s testimony.

Reportedly, during the trial, the defendant introduced himself by name, and the officer that responded to the 911 call testified that the victim identified her attacker and that the person she named had the same name as the defendant. The jury ultimately convicted the defendant, and he appealed, arguing that the State presented insufficient evidence to establish that he was the victim’s attacker. Continue reading

Court Analyzes DNA Identification of Criminal Defendants in Washington

Published on: June 28, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

DNA-217x300 Under Washington law, law enforcement agencies have the duty to collect DNA samples from certain criminal defendants. If a criminal defendant refuses to submit to an agency’s request for a DNA sample, they may be compelled by the courts to comply. This was demonstrated in a recent case in which a defendant charged with an assault crime argued she should not have to comply with DNA identification. If you are accused of an assault offense, it is important to know and understand your rights, and you should confer with a Tacoma assault defense attorney promptly.

Background of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with first-degree assault. She entered a guilty plea and was convicted. Following her conviction, she was directed to provide a biological sample for purposes of DNA identification analysis. She appealed, arguing that the State already had her DNA as she had been convicted of felonies before.

DNA Identification of Criminal Defendants in Washington

The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s order compelling the defendant to provide a DNA sample. The appellate court adopted the state’s argument that the defendant’s appeal was moot. Specifically, the court noted that the Department of Corrections collected the defendant’s DNA shortly after she was sentenced, therefore removing the appellate court’s ability to provide effective relief for the alleged legal error. Continue reading

Fui acusado de hurto en una tienda en Washington. ¿Qué me espera?

Published on: June 24, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

shoplift-200x300 Muchas personas consideran que hurtar mercancía de tiendas es un hurto menor que otros. Después de todo, el acusado de hurto en una tienda tenía derecho a entrar al establecimiento y la mercancía puede no ser de gran valor. Sin embargo, la ley de Washington no lo ve necesariamente así. Aun cuando otros estados distinguen entre hurto de mercancía de tiendas (shoplifting en la ley estadounidense) y otros hurtos (theft en la ley estadounidense) para nuestro estado, no hay diferencia. Un hurto es un hurto, pase donde pase, se hurte lo que se hurte.

La ley del estado de Washington (enlace en inglés) define al hurto como:

Incorrectamente obtener o ejercer control sin autorización sobre la propiedad o servicios de otro o su valor, con intención de privarle de dicha propiedad o servicios.
Engañar para obtener control sobre la propiedad o servicios de otro con intención de privarle de dicha propiedad o servicios.
Apropiarse de propiedad perdida o mal distribuida de otro, o su valor, con intención de privarle de dicha propiedad o servicios.

Como mencionamos anteriormente, que a usted se le acuse de un hurto (enlace en inglés) ocurrido en una tienda no cambia las cosas. Las consecuencias no dependerán del lugar sino del valor de la mercancía en cuestión.

Aún si Pablo y Pedro hurtan objetos de la misma tienda, si Pablo hurta un objeto que vale $2000 y Pedro uno que vale $500, Pablo enfrentará cargos de hurto como delito grave en segundo grado y Pedro hurto como delito menor en tercer grado.

Should Your DUI Case Be Dismissed Because the Toxicologist Has Engaged in Misconduct?

Published on: June 17, 2022 | By The Law Offices of Smith & White, PLLC

“…the Draeger [breath test machine for DUIs] has generated tens of thousands of breath test result[s] … since 2010 in non-compliance with … WAC 448.16.060.” Judge Jahns, on behalf of all the Judges of Kitsap District Court.

The entire Kitsap Distict Court bench has spoken. All four judges agree. All Draeger breath test devices have not complied with the law since their inception. We are talking tens of thousands of breath tests since 2010. If you have a driving under the influence (DUI) case then contact the Tacoma DUI lawyers at Smith & White, PLLC. The reasoning of the court is simple. To summarize their decision: 1) the toxicologist was allowed to make reasonable rules about what is required for a valid test, 2)she created a rule that said the results should be rounded, 3) she had control over the machine’s software, 4) she required that the machine truncate, and not round, 5) she knows, or should have known, that in the scientific community truncate and round have different, specific meanings, 6) she knows, or should have known, that for scientific reliability of the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) that the same procedure should be used in both, 7) Likewise, she knew or should have known that the procedure the machine used needed to follow the administrative code that she created, and 8) she or her various subordinates then sworn, in thousands of cases, that the machine was following the code, i.e., that the machine was rounding and not truncating.

To make matters worse the Impaired Driving Section of the Washington State Patrol (WSP) Forensic Laboratory Services Bureau then sent out a deceptive letter addressing the issue. The Kitsap court determined that a number of the assertions in the letter were “false or misleading.” The letter, entitled “Potential Impeachment Disclosure” was false or misleading in a number of ways. She said that the Impaired Driving Section was notified June 3rd, 2021 that the Draeger potentially failed to comply with the Washington Administrative Code (WAC). However, the court found that they actually knew since the Draeger was approved in 2010. Also, that it “potentially” failed to comply with the WAC was similarly misleading as they knew that it had never complied with the WAC. Similarly, she was false or misleading when she said that this information was coming to light per the “Initial investigation.” Again, her office was on notice of this issue since its inception over a decade prior.