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 Supreme Court: Consecutive Sentences by Court Okay

State v. Vance Vance did bad things to children and was sentenced by a jury to a lot of time for each count charged. He argued the finding of facts necessary to sentence him to consecutive, rather than concurrent sentences ran afoul of Blakely. However, the United States Supreme Court essentially ruled directly on this issue and held that the consecutive/concurrent facts may be found by the court and such findings do not run afoul of the mandate of Blakely that exceptional sentence facts be found by the jury.

Do I agree with this? Not really. Seems a weird distinction for the U.S. Supreme Court to make. Do I think Washington Courts had any other choice given the United States Supreme Court precedent? Not really. We would have to make changes to our constitution or our statutory scheme for that to happen. Though the Court didn't engage in this, a Gunwall analysis would probably merit the same result.

Subscribe in a reader

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