Examples of Our Work
191 Wn.2d 732 (2018)
Reversing the order imposing legal financial obligations upon our client and defining what constitutes an adequate inquiry into an individual's ability to pay in the trial court.
Watch Kate's Oral Argument before the Washington State Supreme Court
Read Kate's Supplemental Brief
191 Wn.2d 278 (2018)
Reinstating our client's treatment-based alternative sentence because the wrong standard of proof was used to revoke the drug offender sentencing alternative (DOSA); requiring the Department of Corrections to prove facts underlying a DOSA revocation by a preponderance of the evidence.
Read Marla's Supplemental Brief
199 Wn. App. 1018 (2017)
Permitting withdrawal of our client's guilty plea because she did not understand an essential element of the crime.
183 Wn. App. 242 (2014)
Reversing our client's persistent offender, life without parole sentence because one prior conviction was invalid on its face and another was not a qualifying offense.
189 Wn.2d 210 (2017)
Reversing an order sanctioning our client because, as a matter of first impression, the trial court lacked statutory authority to sanction our client for sentence violations while our client was under the supervision of the Department of Corrections.
199 Wn. App. 235 (2017)
Reversing an involuntary medication order after determining an individual facing forced medication has a procedural due process right to present an expert in his own defense.
181 Wn.2d 564 (2014)
Reversing conviction and granting a new trial because the superior court improperly interviewed jurors in chambers, in violation of the constitutional right to a public trial.
200 Wn. App. 904 (2017)
Reversing our client's involuntary civil commitment order because the trial court misinterpreted statutory language regarding the likelihood of serious harm element.
162 Wn. App. 1067 (2011)
Reversing parental termination order as to our client father because the State failed to show that it had offered all necessary services.
177 Wn. App. 519 (2013)
Requiring new hearing for admissibility of evidence obtained using a novel scientific tool to predict dangerousness in our client's involuntary civil commitment case.