Author Archive

Toyota vehicles have had a reputation in recent years as being pretty well made.  That has been in jeopardy recently when Toyota has announced the recall of several of their vehicles.  According to the Spokesman-Review this morning, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is looking into allegations of momentary loss of braking capability in the Toyota Prius while traveling over uneven road surfaces, potholes or bumps.  Hey, those roads kind of sound like the roads of Ferry County don’t they?  Or even worse the pothole ridden roads of the city of Spokane.  Additionally, there has been a problem with the Toyota’s suddenly accelerating for no reason.  Much of the investigation has come from reporters from the LA Times and trial lawyers who have been researching the safety records of these cars. According to an LA Times blog:

Reporters Ken Bensinger and Martin Zimmerman first wrote about an upcoming recall by Toyota on Sept. 30 that blamed floor mats for causing a gas pedal to stick. This came in the wake of a horrific crash near San Diego in August that killed an off-duty California Highway Patrol officer and three members of his family after his Lexus sped out of control.

Trial lawyers are already advertising their interests in taking such cases, see here, for example.  I can predict the class action suit settlement already.  The lawyers get $5 million dollars attorney fees, and the three people killed in the San Diego crash get coupons for floor mats.

What is interesting, is it is actually pretty hard to find a definitive list of what cars are actually subject to recall.  The Toyota Press Room explains:

The specific model names and years associated with the newly-expanded population of subject vehicles for the pedal entrapment recall include:

2008-2010 Highlander
2009-2010 Corolla
2009-2010 Venza
2009-2010 Matrix
2009-2010 Pontiac Vibe

I am not sure that is definitive.  You think Toyota would have this information on line and that it would be pretty easy to find.  What will come of the recall?  Will the problems be found to be broader then first announced?  Will the Toyota brand take a permanent hit?

(By Steve Graham, a Criminal Defense Lawyer)

Have you ever been a party to a class action suit?  One time my father was.  An airline screwed him and thousands of other travelers by fixing their prices in violation of anti-trust statutes.   When I was a kid, my father used to fly about once a week at times, so he joined the suit and figured he had some money coming.  Nope.  The attorneys settled the case, reaped huge attorney fees, and all my dad got was  a coupon for about fifty dollars to be used on a future flight.  The coupon had so many restrictions on its use that it was virtually worthless.  My dad wasn’t happy.  This was about 20 years ago, but problems continue with these suits.

In 2001 Block Buster video opted to  settle a class-action lawsuit over late fees, and the attorneys suing Blockbuster agreed that Blockbuster should issue coupons to the plaintiffs for free or dollar-off movie rentals.  The Texas attorneys that settled the suit saw to it that the settlement gave them $9.5 million in attorneys fees.  Critics attacked the settlement as another glaring example of what is wrong with a system whose prime beneficiaries are the lawyers.

I thought of this recently when I read in The Olympian this morning about a California judge who fought back against the system.   An attorney attempted to settle a class action suit against a woman’s clothing store that violated credit card laws.   He proposed a settlement where he would receive $125,000 cash and the women would get $10 coupons.  Judge Brett C. Klein instead ordered that the male attorney would instead get $125,000 worth of non-transferable coupons for women’s clothes.   The attorney wanted to be paid $395 per hour and instead got coupons.  Pretty funny, huh?  The California Bar didn’t think so.  As announced in the news story here, the judge was accused of grandstanding by releasing the story to the newspaper.  The judge didn’t care as he was about to retire and even agreed to the discipline action rather than fight it.  If the judge wanted to draw attention to class action coupon scams, he definitely succeeded.  The story has been picked up by the wire service and is all over the country now.  If you want to read the decision admonishing the judge, it is online here.

My dad would love it.

Here in Washington, there has been criticism of similar class action settlements.  In the case of Picket vs. Holland America cruise line, Justice Sanders of the Washington Supreme Court complained about a proposed settlement.     In his dissent, Justice Sanders explained:

The settlement would offer discount coupons having virtually no practical value to class members. Although Holland claimed the 1.5 million coupons offered had an aggregate face value of $ 20 million, the conditions placed on redeeming these coupons, coupled with the nature of Holland’s price schedule, ensured only a miniscule portion of these coupons would ever be used, and even then only if a class member paid Holland thousands of dollars for future trips. The coupons ranged in value from $ 10 to $ 50 and were subject to a so-called “capacity control” restriction, meaning they could be used only on travels booked less than 45 days from departure. However Holland frequently sells its cruises on an early-purchase, reduced-fare basis. Savings under this early-purchase scheme range as high as 20-25 percent of the ticket price, which sometimes goes as high as $ 5,000. Naturally, reasonable travelers will not forgo such large savings to receive a coupon credit of only $ 10 because early-purchase discounts would more than offset whatever illusory benefit might be achieved from the settlement.

What a racket.  The so called coupons are really pretty worthless.  What do you think?  Time for a little reform?  Did Judge Klein bring attention to this issue agreeing to be disciplined by the California Bar?

I have had the pleasure of working recently with Robert Gaines, a private investigator in Okanogan County.  I believe I met Bob Gaines some years back when he was a detective for the Okanogan County Sheriff’s Office and the Task Force and I was a prosecutor.  He has a lot of detective experience, and recently he has been helping me as a defense investigator in a case in Okanogan.  He has been great to work with.  He is also available for insurance and fraud investigations, service of process and civil papers.  Check out his website Cascade Investigations.  He has been a great asset to me because he understands how Okanogan works.  For those of you unfamiliar with the area, Okanogan County is about the size of my home state of Connecticut.  Okanogan County is 5,315 square miles, and Connecticut is 5,544.  So having a local help me out is an asset.  Bob Gaines will also be taking cases in Chelan County and Douglas County.  Although people may often think of private investigators as being important in divorce cases, etc., actually, having a private investigator in a criminal case is important.  Much like an indigent defendant has a right to an attorney at public expense, defendants in major criminal cases are entitled to investigators at public expense to assist the defense lawyer.

Recently the Washington State Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a juvenile who plead guilty, and then sought to withdraw his plea.  See State v. A.N.J.  Part of the reason the court allowed the defendant to withdraw the plea was because the original defense lawyer took no steps to investigate the case.

In Washington, a person with proper documentation from a physician can legally possess marijuana, right?  It isn’t that simple.   The State Supreme Court essentially said this month that even if you possess the valid certificate from a doctor, the police can still search your house and still arrest you.  The certificate can only be brought up later in court to defend you.  See decision.  In a case out of  Stevens County, Washington, the sheriffs deputies approached the home of Jason and Tina Fry and smelled marijuana from the front porch.   Tina Fry presented proof of medical authorization, but the police obtained a warrant anyway.  As you would expect, marijuana was found in the home.  The Frys’ criminal defense lawyer filed a motion to dismiss and to have the search thrown out of court.  The Stevens County judge denied the lawyer’s motion to suppress the evidence.   The Frys’ defense lawyer appealed all the way up to the State Supreme Court.  There the court explained:

A police officer would have probable cause to believe Fry committed a crime when the officer smelled marijuana emanating from the Frys’ residence. Fry presented the officer with documentation purporting to authorize his use of marijuana. Nevertheless, the authorization only created a potential affirmative defense that would excuse the criminal act. The authorization does not, however, result in making the act of possessing and using marijuana noncriminal or negate any elements of the charged offense. Therefore, based on the information of a marijuana growing operation and the strong odor of marijuana when the officers approached the Frys’ home, a reasonable inference was established that criminal activity was taking place in the Frys’ residence. Therefore, the officers had probable cause and the search warrant was properly obtained.

The ruling essentially says that medical marijuana is not legal; rather it is illegal until you go to court and present a defense.  Is that clear?  Unfortunately not.  Another similar area of the law was fought out in December in King County Superior Court.  Aaron Pelley, a Seattle criminal defense lawyer, won a legal challenge on behalf of Scott Verner, a medical marijuana patient.   During a routine traffic stop, a state trooper smelled the marijuana in Verner’s car and searched it even though Verner produced a doctor’s authorization.  Attorney Aaron Pelley took the State to court and won a groundbreaking case that forced the police to return the marijuana.  I am sure the police considered that quite an indignity.  But, it is probably also  an indignity for sick medical marijuana patients to stand by the side of the road when their cars are searched.  The article made news nationally, and is available here.

Are marijuana patients and criminal defense lawyers the only ones who are fed up with the confusion in the law?  Mason County Prosecuting Attorney Gary Burleson also seems fed up.  “I don’t have a problem with marijuana being legal, and I don’t have a problem with it being illegal,” Burleson said. “But right now, I have a big problem understanding what’s legal and what’s not.”  See story.

See prior post on medical marijuana.

What do you think?  Was the Supreme Court’s ruling correct?  The court seemed to take a narrow view of the law and a literal reading of the earlier initiative authorizing medical use.  Is the new initiative more clear?  What can we look forward to from the courts in the future?  Doesn’t it seem like the police are reluctant to fully respect the medical marijuana law?  What will their reaction be to the legalization or decriminalization of marijuana?

The jury considering the assault charges against Paul Schene announced Friday that they were deadlocked, and a mistrial was declared and the jury released. Paul Schene, was a King County deputy sheriff, and was charged with 4th Degree Assault  for allegedly assaulting Malika Calhoun in a video widely distributed online.  See prior post.  The jury voted 11-1 to convict.

The prosecutor’s office announced that they would be retrying the case.  I know the customary practice in misdemeanor cases in King County is to not retry misdemeanor hung juries.  This case doesn’t seem to be the average misdemeanor.  The strategy of Schene’s criminal defense attorney, Peter Offenbecher, was to break the video down frame by frame and have the accused officer explain every action he took in terms of his police training.  As reported in a Seattle-Times article:

On the witness stand Tuesday, Schene said he used standard techniques taught at the police academy to control Calhoun.  He said he first kicked her to spin her around, grabbed her hair to control her, shoved her against a wall in a failed attempt to handcuff her and forced her to the ground by her hair to apply handcuffs.  He said he punched Calhoun twice in the left shoulder while she was on the ground because she was resisting him and his partner, who was also trying to handcuff her.  … Standing before a TV monitor using a pointer, Schene explained his actions as jurors watched freeze-framed video of the encounter.

You tend to see a frame by frame analysis of the video clips in question when officers are charged with assault based on video.

Police Practices Expert Charles L Duke testified for the defense when the LAPD beat Rodney King

In the prosecution of the LAPD officers who beat Rodney King, the defense used police practices expert Charles Duke.  He did a frame-by-frame analysis of the videotape for the jury to support the contention that reasonable force was used.   He testified that all 56 baton swings were justified in his expert opinion under police protocols.   See related article from 1993.  In the Rodney King case the prosecutor and the defense both used expert witnesses in police procedure.  The prosecutor’s expert Sgt. Mark Konta testified that the first baton blows may have been justified but not the remaining blows.

In the case of Paul Schene’s criminal charges, it doesn’t appear from the news coverage that either the prosecutor or the defense lawyer called any use of force experts to testify.  It would be interesting to see what Charles Duke would say about this video footage of Paul Schene and Malika Calhoun.

When the police beat Rodney King and the footage was broadcast on CNN people were shocked.  I was in college at the time.   I don’t remember officers being caught on tape in such a manner prior to that.  Now, these sort of matters make the news all the time.  A person could spend all day on youtube looking at such incidents.

What is it like for the prosecutors who handle the cases against the cops?  Is there resentment among the other officers that typically work with the prosecutor?  What pressure is put on them?  I may blog about this subject in the future.

What thoughts do have on this case?

(By Steve Graham, Defense Attorney)

Four years can go by fast.  One day you are elected and on the top of the world, and then New Years Day 2010 comes around, and like a hangover, the unpleasant reality of an election year is upon you.   Rural prosecuting attorneys who won large pay raises last year (see post) will face an increase in interest for their jobs.  But, starting in Okanogan County, it appears that the prosecuting attorney could be unopposed.  East of there in Ferry County, Prosecuting Attorney Mike Sandona is almost certain to face a challenger. It was almost four years ago that he staged a coup d’etat when he ran against his boss.   He won by a large majority, and everything after that would seem to be downhill.  But that hasn’t stopped him from preparing for an election battle by joining every civic group known to mankind.

In Stevens County, Tim Rasmussen ousted four-termer Gerry Wettle for prosecuting attorney in 2006.  He does not have an election challenger that has announced publicly yet.   Mr Rasmussen connects with voters through his regular column “Prosecutor’s Corner”.  See sample.

The Sheriff’s races in the region may be interesting.  I was surprised to see a campaign bumper sticker as early as last October in Okanogan. Dave Yarnell has announced his candidacy for Sheriff in Okanogan County, and has a pretty impressive website here.  Mr. Yarnell mentioned some dissatisfaction with the current situation in the department in a newspaper article but he doesn’t get into specifics.   I guess there is plenty of time to discuss specific issues in the long hot summer of that region.   He is probably smart to get his web site up early because it can take awhile sometimes for search engines to even find your site.

In Ferry County, there was talk about election year challenges to Pete Warner.  I received emails from people encouraging Ray Maycumber and Tom Williams to run, but that seems unlikely (from an outsider’s perspective) in light of the fact that Pete Warner just promoted Maycumber to the position of 911 coordinator,  and has apparently made Tom Williams the undersheriff.  Other candidates have been mentioned as possibilities but no one that I have talked to has declared.  I did a poll last year with limited success – see here.  Comments are always welcome but I think for comments about political races people need to post their first and last name.

The Washington State legislature recently has considered certain bills to legalize or decriminalize marijuana.  House Bill 1177, introduced by Mary Lou Dickerson, a Democrat of Seattle, would decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana and make it an infraction similar to a speeding ticket.  Similarly, HB 2401 would legalize the drug outright.

But Ric Smith, of the group Sensible Washington, didn’t sound too interested.  He has pushed for a voter initiative that would legalize marijuana.   The voter initiative would attempt to collect enough signatures directly from voters to have the law put on the ballot for a direct vote of the people.  While others at a legislative hearing pushed the legislators to pass the law, Smith told them “We’re going to take it out of your hands, and we’re sorry about that…”  He continued:  “Just wait for our initiative; it’ll take care of everything.”  (See story).   Is he correct?  Will the voter’s pass an initiative that would legalize marijuana?

It may have sounded like Ric Smith was telling the legislature to take a hike, but this was probably not his intent.  After the hearing, I noticed Sensible Washington’s website posted the statement “Sensible Washington certainly appreciates the hard work of legislators who have supported these measures….”

The group Sensible Washington is gathering signatures to put the issue before the voters in the November 2010 general election.  The measure would remove all criminal penalties under Washington law for the adult use of marijuana as well as the possession and cultivation of marijuana.

What do you think?

Former King County Sheriff’s Deputy Paul Schene is pending trial now on one count of Assault Fourth Degree for allegedly assaulting a 15-year-old girl he arrested.  Below is a copy of the jail footage of the incident.

So this was a while ago.  Deputy Paul Schene has since been fired.  The latest is that Paul Schene is now pending trial on one count of Assault Fourth Degree and the trial will resume this Tuesday.  So the system works, I guess.  Schene is facing trial.  I guess what bugs me is that on top of the fact that he roughed up Malika Calhoun, Paul Schene also attempted to charge her with assaulting him.   I had to watch the video a few times before I figured out that Paul Schene justified his take down on Calhoun by the fact that she flicked her shoe at his leg when she took it off.   It is also a little disturbing that the other police officer pretty much just stands there while this is going on.  He doesn’t seem particularly disturbed when he sees what his fellow officer does, although I guess he does seem a little taken aback when the punches start.

Jurors give a lot of deference to police officers, and are slow to disbelieve them when they allege that they have been assaulted.  If it weren’t for the video, Malika Calhoun could be the one on trial for assault, and she would probably be convicted.

See the story in the Seattle-Times.  The police officer Paul Schene is being represented by defense lawyer Peter Offenbecher of Seattle.  The story in the paper explains the defense approach.  It seems like Offenbecher has a pretty big challenge in light of the video tape evidence, but then again everyone thought the LAPD would be convicted of the assault of Rodney King too.

What does everyone else think about this case?  Obviously our system should protect the police as much as we can from assaults, but other than video-taped proof, how can we tell when the police lie or exaggerate?

I read an interesting article this week in the Spokesman-Review about Eagle High School in Boise, where biology teacher Misty Sterk is teaching a semester long class in forensic science.  (See article).  I found this interesting because forensic science can be a little gruesome.   High school students need to be treated with a little more caution then college kids.  I sometime coach mock trial teams in high school, and I try to be careful with kids even on the subject of court cases.

Ketchup from the lunch room?

But in this class apparently, the kids are not particularly squeamish.  One student explained to the reporter: “With a knife wound, for example, a blood spatter indicating a downward trajectory means the attacker was probably right-handed, because with a left-handed person the spatter would be more horizontal.”   The article goes on to explain that the class “is getting students excited about science by processing a crime scene, using maggots to determine time of death, fingerprinting, analyzing blood spatters, and determining race and sex based on skeletal remains, DNA testing and ballistics.”

The article made me wonder how the blood spatter science could be appropriately taught in a high school.   When I took a course at the state police academy near Seattle, blood spatter science was taught in the gymnasium.  First the instructor spread out giant sheets of white paper over the floor.  Next he swung a bat repeatedly into a sponge soaked with pigs blood.  We studied how the blood droplets struck the paper.   I am not sure you can teach the subject with fake blood because any other substance will have a different viscosity and surface tension.   I am sure the teacher, being a pro, has found some way to teach this in a manner appropriate for kids.  In the world of forensics, the science is usually referred to as blood “spatter” rather than blood “splatter” but the two words are really synonyms.

I would bet that the part of the course on identification of human bones would be pretty interesting.  In 1998, I took a class in forensic anthropology at Eastern Washington University taught by Dr. Sarah Keller.   Also in the class was attorney Karl Sloan, who is now the Okanogan County Prosecuting Attorney.   The “final exam” for the class consisted of  being handed a bunch of bones in a shoe box and having to identify them.   Some bones are pretty basic, but the bones in the hands and feet are almost impossible to identify.  The subject of identification of bones  does not come up too often in forensics.  I did see, however, that this was an issue in a recent fire in Curlew, Washington.  In the news story, it was explained that a forensic anthropologist was needed to assist in identifying the bones.   The class I took at EWU didn’t make anyone an expert, but it helped teach the basic science.  Dr. Keller explained that people would be shocked at how many times police detectives would bring in a bone for her to examine that was clearly an animal bone, and that that should have been obvious.  She explained that certain bear bones can often appear to be human bones.

The television show C.S.I. has been on for about ten years.  It has been very popular and has drawn a lot of student interest in the profession.  Even many students at Eagle High School were interested in it.  Both Eastern Washington University and Seattle University have 4-year degrees available in forensics.   But despite the growing interest in the field of forensic scientists, the labs always seem to be short-staffed.  Last week, the Skagit Valley Herald printed an article describing how a shortage of qualified technicians in the state crime lab has created a huge backlog of evidence to be tested, even in serious cases such as shootings.   Washington State is trying to recruit forensic science technicians from as far away as South Africa.  A list of schools teaching forensic science is available here.  I looked at Gonzaga’s website and it does not appear that they have a degree program in forensic science at this time.

Forensic science plays a roll more and more in court cases.  The science changes all the time and criminal defense attorneys and prosecutors keep up through various trainings around the country.   If a defense lawyer does not know the science well, it is difficult to properly defend his or her client.   The use of faulty forensic science is a big cause of wrongful convictions.  About 1/2 of the 232 people that the Innocence Project has helped free were originally convicted at trial by “unvalidated or improper” forensics.    Last February, the National Academy of Science issued a report criticizing the sloppy practices of crime labs, imprecise scientific tests, and the exaggeration in court of the scientific reliability of results.   Many of these tests criticized are similar to scientific results being used (or misused) in the courts of Spokane County, Grant County, Okanogan County and other areas of Eastern Washington.

Idaho has had a new rash of hate crimes in the last year.  Last Friday, Brittany Edelblute’s Subaru was spray painted with swastikas.   In an article in the Spokesman-Review this morning, it was explained that Brittany Edelblute was apparently targeted because she has friends who are African-American that come by her house.  She has had a problem with people shouting racial slurs while they drive by.   A photo of her damaged vehicle is online here.  I blogged about a similar incident last month against Haitham Joudeh here and here.   In the news coverage last month in the Coeur D’Alene Press, the comment section was full of hateful comments.   The whole story was later taken down.  This time, the Coeur D’Alene Press did not post a story online about the crime against Brittany Edelblute.   Last month, a majority of the people making comments online accused Haitham Joudeh of vandalizing his own car just to get sympathy.

Why does this stuff always happen in North Idaho?  I don’t think it is just happenstance. It seems that the people in power over there inadvertently foster such behavior by their own actions.  Look at the shabby way Kootenai County Commissioners Rick Currie, Todd Tondee and Richard Piazza treated Haitham Joudeh.  Haitham Joudeh, an Idaho native of middle-eastern descent, sought a building permit.  The local Planning Department did not object to the project.  In addition, after a lengthy public hearing where all sides were held, the Hearing Examiner Rebecca A. Zanetti recommended that the permit be approved.  But neighbors put together an anti-Joudeh rally against the applicant, and the county commissioners bowed to pressure and rejected the permit.   Haitham Joudeh complained that during the rally and the public hearing, many negative comments were made about his religion and ancestry.   Commissioner Rick Currie is a member of the Mica Grange, the group that allegedly held the anti-Joudeh rally.   Currie boasts of his membership to this group on his re-election website.

I have done a fair amount of land-use law in my practice, and it sure seems strange that the county commissioners would not approve a permit when the experts did not see a problem with it.  And if the commissioners are affiliated with groups opposing the permit, they have a duty to step down and appoint a neutral decision maker.

I hope that journalists start to look at this problem in North Idaho as a whole.  A business owner who faces discrimination in the permitting process is not as quick and easy to write about as spray-painted swastikas, but the story deserves attention.   When county commissioners and civic groups foster an attitude 1) that is suspicious of outsiders, 2) that applies different standards to newcomers, and 3) when they do not sufficiently condemn the bigoted statements of their constituents, they inadvertently create an atmosphere that allows the incidents of street vandalism to flourish.

What do you think?  Why do you think these incidents of vandalism and swastikas have occurred?  Brittany Edelblute expressed frustration that the police officer asked her if she wanted to “press charges” over the incident.  Why do you think the officer asked that?   What are the advantages of remaining silent?  Last month the comments to the articles online often attacked Haitham Joudeh.   Will the newspapers better enforce their guidelines for posting comments?

What do you suppose the Coeur D’Alene Chamber of Commerce thinks of all this?  Does Coeur D’Alene want to be known as a first-class vacation destination or a backwater struggling with frequent hate-crimes.   The article in the Spokesman-Review quotes an official who seemed to think that the solution is in law-enforcement?  Is this correct?   Take a look at an interesting article explaining the position of the NAACP leader V. Anne Smith on the issue of hate crimes in Spokane.  (See article).   How would this advice go over in Coeur D’Alene?