Subscribe in a reader


Issaquah Law Group: Experienced Counsel; Client Focus

PHILOSOPHY: Formed in 2014, Issaquah Law Group is a law firm with one focus: providing businesses and insurers with high quality legal representation with the responsiveness of a smaller firm. ILG was founded on the principle that strong client relationships are the key to successful legal representation and strong relationships are built upon clear and consistent communication. 

LITIGATION: We work closely with our clients to fully and accurately understand their goals, work collaboratively to formulate specific legal strategies, and execute the agreed plan of action utilizing methods most likely to result in the efficient and effective resolution of the matter. 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 in the areas of personal injury and wrongful death, product liability, commercial general liability, labor & employment, construction litigation, and catastrophic losses due to fire and explosion.

BUSINESS LAW: Rarely is the path from point A to point B a straight line, so our role in a business law practice is to find alternatives, devise workable strategies, and keep your business ideas, goals and objectives moving toward realization. ILG’s business attorneys help clients achieve their goals with respect to business formation, intellectual property, labor and employment, CAN-SPAM, copyright and trademark

COMMUNITY: In addition, the Lawyers at Issaquah Law Group remain active in the legal and civic community. A core commitment of our Issaquah Attorneys is community service. Our attorneys' civic involvement includes the King County Civil Rights Commission; the City of Issaquah Planning Policy Commission; the Northwest Screenwriters Guild, service as a pro tem judge. We live and work in the Pacific Northwest, and we aim to make it a better place.

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