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 Supreme Court: No-contact order re: children requires "reasonably necessary to serve the State's interests."

PRP of Rainey

Rainey was convicted of 1st degree kidnapping and telephone harassment. Essentially he kidnapped his daughter and took her to Mexico. As part of the sentence, the judge imposed a no-contact order for the statutory maximum of his sentence, which in this case was life. Rainey challenged the imposition under Blakely, however, "a Washington trial court has the discretion to impose a crime-related prohibition up to the statutory maximum for the crime of which the defendant is convicted without resort to aggravating factors of any kind." Thus, Blakely was not violated.

As to his parental rights, here, the State has a compelling interest in protection of victims of crime from future harm. However, while the State has an interest in doing so, the scope must be analyzed in terms of the need. For instance, indirect contact through monitored letters may still protect the victim.

Of course, the court essentially gave the trial court the exact reasoning it would need to lay out to support a blanket no contact order (I always find unsubtle hints to lower courts amusing). Of course, because the blanket ban is reasonably necessary now does not mean that it will be reasonably necessary later, and the trial court needs to explain why lifetime is reasonably necessary.

Subscribe in a reader

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