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

In re PRP of Carter

Carter was convicted of 1st degree robbery in 1998.  He had prior convictions in Oregon and California.  He appealed his conviction arguing that his right to a fair trial was violated when the jury saw him in shackles.  He also argued that he should not have received a persistent offender sentence because his California assault is not a "strike" offense compared to Washington's "strike" offense.  The court of appeals held that that he was not prejudiced when a juror saw him in shackles and rejected Carter's argument that his California assault was not comparable to the more serious offense in Washington.  The Supreme Court denied his petition for review.  He filed a habeas petition, which was dismissed as procedurally barred. In his PRP he seeks relief from he shackling and comparability issue.

The court stated that his petition was untimely as it was several years post conviction, thus, carter would have to meet an exception.  The court found no exception existed for the shackling argument and therefore held that the petition was untimely as to the same.

The court found an exception to the untimely petition regarding the comparability issue under the very rare “actually innocent” exception.  The court emphasizes that this exception is rarely used, however, finds that justice requires them to invoke the exception in this case.  They reason that the California offense is not legally comparable to the Washington second degree assault offense based on the different intent elements. The court vacated Carter’s persistent offender sentence and remanded for resentencing.

Subscribe in a reader

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