Subscribe in a reader


Issaquah Law Group - Injury Litigation Attorneys

TRUST: Personal injuries are personal. Which is why the attorneys at ILG treat every client and every case differently. Because they are different, and extremely personal. ILG was founded on the principle that strong client relationships are the key to successful legal representation and strong relationships are built on trust. Trust that you will be heard. Trust that you will be protected. Trust that every effort will be made to see justice done in your case. The singular goal of every ILG attorney is to earn and preserve that trust.

EXPERIENCE: ILG attorneys have a broad base of litigation experience to draw on in all Federal and State courts from on-the-ground investigations to Supreme Court appeals and we bring this experience to bear on behalf of our clients in personal injury and wrongful death claims arising out of motor vehicle accidents, bus versus pedestrian accidents, defective and dangerous products, medical malpractice, slip/trip and fall accidents, and catastrophic losses due to fire.

LOCATION: We are located on the Eastside in Issaquah, convenient to Bellevue, Redmond, Kirkland, Renton, Sammamish and North Bend. However, we provide legal services in King County, Pierce County, Snohomish County and throughout the entire state of Washington.

In addition, through The Amateur Law Professor Blog and LinkedIn postings, we share pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Supreme Court, as well as the pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Courts of Appeal so that our clients can be as update to date on cutting legal issues as we are.

WA Legal Roundup - Washington State Supreme Court

State v. Heddrick

Heddrick's competency was questioned. He was sent for an eval. The reports came back. He had two lawyers on two different charges. The reports came back and the the counsel that brought the competency withdrew it. Counsel did not sign for other counsel as to the competency, however.

Now, competency procedure wasn't fully followed in either case. RCW 10.77.065(1)(a)(i) requires the reports to be entered into evidence, and one of the doc's findings was never memorialized in a report and given to the court and the parties. Instead, the court relied on waiver of that process by counsel, even though, "It is axiomatic that a person incompetent to stand trial cannot affect a knowing or intelligent waiver," and competency procedures are "mandatory and not merely directory." The court instead followed a court of appeals opinion that such procedure may be waived by counsel.

I don't like this opinion one bit. No offense to those who wrote it. That counsel be able to waive the competency of their client means that counsel, and not the client, is controlling the decision.

Subscribe in a reader

Copyright 2014-2018 by Issaquah Law Group, PLLC. Powered by Squarespace. Background image by jakeliefer.