In an important new criminal law decision, The Court of Appeals of Washington reversed a conviction in a vehicular homicide case in State v. Imokawa. The court held that the jury instructions did not make it reasonably clear that the state had to disprove alternate causation of the accident which led to the fatal injury. I was co-counsel on appeal with the trial lawyer who tried the case.
In an important criminal law decision regarding the right to privacy, the Washington Court of Appeals recently decided that the police could not enter a homeless person's tent/tarp shelter without a warrant. The decision recognizes that under Washington's Constitution, Article I, §7, a homeless person should have the same rights to privacy in his makeshift shelter that other Washington residents have in their homes or apartments.
The Washington Supreme Court recently issued an important criminal law decision which will free a man who has been in prison since 2006, based on the "bedrock" constitutional principle of double jeopardy.
The Washington Supreme Court recently issued a decision in the area of criminal law which tried to clarify when prosecutors can refile charges after a jury has reached a verdict on a lesser included offense. State v. Glasmann, (May 7, 2015)
in an important case involving prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument, the Washington Supreme Court reversed a first degree murder conviction in State v. Walker. The decision was announced on January 22, 2015, and reaffirms the criminal law requirement of a fair jury trial.
The Washington Supreme Court decided State v. W.R. on October 30, 2014 and clarified the burden of proof in rape cases. The juvenile defendant (W.R.) was charged with second degree rape. In a bench trial, since jury trials are not allowed in juvenile court under Washington criminal law, the trial judge found W.R guilty of second degree rape. The defense had argued that the sexual intercourse between W. R. and another juvenile had been consensual. The trial court ruled that the defendant had not proven consent and that he had the burden to do so.
In the age of Facebook, where people post the most interesting (and potentially embarrassing) things about themselves, are people really concerned about their right to privacy? In Washington, our state constitution has a very explicit protection of the right to privacy: