Subscribe in a reader

ISSAQUAH LAW GROUP   PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION LAWYERS

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.

Division I: Alternative Means of Burglary Doesn't Include Varying Intents

State v. Sony (no, not THAT Sony)

This is a case all about the alternative means doctrine. Now, as most of you know by now, The Professor does not delve much into criminal law. This case involves a burglary (of the residential variety) and the application of this doctrine.

Now the crime here is nothing spectacular. Scary, yes. Extraordinary, no. A woman woke up to find a weirdo in her apartment saying that he was the police and that he believed in God. He went and took some quarters from the counter in the kitchen and money from a wallet, and woke up the woman’s boyfriend who is sleeping on the couch.

Here, Sony tried to argue that the state was required to prove that he was either there to commit a crime against person or there to commit a crime against property. However, the burglary statute only requires an intent to commit a crime.  While it’s true that burglary can be considered an alternative means crime, the two means are entering a building with intent to commit a crime or remaining in the building with an intent to commit a crime. The intent element of the burglary statute is not subject to an alternative means analysis. Once you have proven that he was there with the intent to commit a crime, any crime, that is sufficient.

Now, this doesn’t mean that there are times when one would have to prove the intent to commit a crime against a person versus the intent to commit a crime against property. However, this is limited to those cases where the charging document actually lists that intent very specifically. That was not the case here.

As such, Sony’s appeal was affirmed.

Subscribe in a reader

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