Subscribe in a reader


Issaquah Law Group - Personal 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: Division II

State v. Johnson

Johnson was convicted of 2nd degree child molestation.  He appeals the conviction arguing that the court impermissibly allowed opinion testimony from a law witness, ineffective counsel for failing to object to the testimony, the court impermissibly commented on the evidence, and the trial court improperly imposed an exceptional sentence. 

The State introduced testimony that the wife of the accused had a conversation with the victim and that the victim admitted a sexual relationship with the accused and that based on that information the wife tried to commit suicide.  The trial court gave an instruction that stated that the defendant’s story does not need to be corroborated to be convicted. 

Johnson argued that the trial court should not have allowed the testimony of his wife’s conversation with the victim and her alleged suicide attempt after because it was improper opinion testimony to his guilt and introduced only for the reason that his wife believed that he was guilty.  This was not raised at trial and therefore the court looks to determine if a manifest Constitutional error occurred. The court finds three problems with the testimony; first that it did not shed light on the credibility of any witness or evidence, that the evidence is collateral and a witness should not be impeached on a collateral matter, and finally that it was very prejudicial.  The court also finds that this is a Constitutional error because it implicates Johnson’s right to a fair trial and actually affects his right to a fair trial.  The court explicitly holds that the testimony was inadmissible and served no other purpose but to prejudice the jury. 

The court reverses on the above argument but also holds that the instruction given by the trial court was not a erroneous comment on evidence. 

Subscribe in a reader

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