Category Archives: Coronavirus

A Trial Court’s COVID-19 Protocols Are “Trial Management Decisions.”

Courts Making Juror Safety a Top Priority | United States Courts

In State v. Ferguson, the WA Court of Appeals held that imposing COVID-19 protocols are “trial management decisions.” The use of masks, a transparent partition between counsel and client, and some jurors being seated behind counsel table during trial to allow for social distancing did not violate the defendant’s rights at trial.

BACKGROUND FACTS

On April 16, 2019,  a man and his son went for a walk. When they returned home, they noticed a man inside the garage. They recognized the man as Mr. Ferguson. An altercation occurred. Afterward, Ferguson fled the scene by running through a nearby field to a neighbor’s home. The police responded and ultimately found Ferguson at the neighbor’s house. Ferguson was arrested.

Ferguson was initially charged with first degree burglary. His charges were later amended to also include felony harassment, third degree malicious mischief, second degree criminal trespass of the neighbor’s house, bail jumping, and witness tampering.

TRIAL COURT’S COVID-19 PROTOCOLS

Following delay and multiple continuances partly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Ferguson’s case proceeded to trial. Ferguson’s jury trial was the first to take place in the county since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, the trial court implemented a variety of COVID-19 protocols for the trial.

Some members of the jury were seated behind the counsel tables in the courtroom gallery. This was done in order to socially distance the jurors and the participants. And everyone in the court room was instructed to wear face masks. The trial court also instructed the jurors to raise their hands if they could not hear something during the trial.

Plexiglass partitions were also placed between participants, including between Ferguson and his counsel at their table. Throughout the trial, Ferguson and his counsel would lean or move back behind the partition to speak to each other and would pass notes to each other.

After all witnesses had testified, Ferguson’s counsel requested a mistrial based on the COVID-19 protocols. Specifically, counsel argued the plexiglass partition between counsel and Ferguson, coupled with the seating arrangement for the jurors, compromised their ability to have necessary attorney-client communications. Ferguson’s counsel contended that because they could not hear each other through the plexiglass partition, the jurors were possibly able to overhear private communications. The trial court denied the motion for a mistrial.

The jury found Ferguson guilty of first degree burglary, third degree malicious mischief, second degree criminal trespass, bail jumping on a class A felony, and tampering with a witness.

Ferguson appealled his conviction on numerous arguments challenging the COVID-19 protocols used for his trial. Ferguson argued that the plexiglass between him and his counsel forced them to lean back to communicate with each other and may have allowed the jurors to overhear them. Ferguson also argued that the masks required him and his counsel to speak louder than they typically would, potentially disclosing their confidential attorney-client communications to the jurors and the State. Finally, he argued the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his request for a mistrial due to these protocols.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The Court of Appeals reasoned that Ferguson’s trial was the first in the county since the beginning of the pandemic and the suspension of all jury trials. The trial court implemented these protocols to ensure that the trial could safely proceed, as it was required to do by our Supreme Court.

“Plexiglass partitions, mandatory masking, and social distancing that forced jurors to be located throughout the gallery were all modifications to the trial court’s typical courtroom arrangement and procedures that fall within the court’s discretion and were based on the Supreme Court’s multiple orders.” ~WA Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals further reasoned that the impact on Ferguson’s rights, while not negligible, was not onerous. Although Ferguson and his counsel were not able to communicate as easily as they would have been without the COVID-19 protections in place, the video record of the trial shows that he and his counsel were able to lean back minimally to speak around the plexiglass partition and write notes to each other. And the record shows that Ferguson and his counsel communicated in those ways frequently. Ferguson claims that he spoke louder than normal because of the masks, but private communication with his counsel would have been more likely because of the same social distancing requirements about which Ferguson now complains.

“No reasonable juror would draw any inference personally against Ferguson because of the implementation of plexiglass partitions, masks, and social distancing. COVID-19 protocols are simply not comparable to other inherently prejudicial decisions, like requiring the defendant to wear prison clothes or restraints that could signal dangerousness. See Caver, 195 Wn. App. at 780-81. Because impermissible factors were not brought into play and the changes furthered essential state interests, the COVID-19 protocols satisfy the closer scrutiny required for inherently prejudicial trial management decisions.” ~WA Court of Appeals

With that, the Court of Appeals held that the COVID-19 protocols implemented in Ferguson’s trial were permissive trial management decisions. Also, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying Ferguson’s motion for a mistrial.

Fortunately, I’ve held numerous jury trials in the era of COVID-19. Unfortunately, it hasn’t gotten an easier. How do you question a prospective juror when the juror is wearing a mask? Watch the eyes. After all, that is about all you can see of the juror’s face.  Body language plays a role.  Jury questionnaires are enormously helpful, as are the use of electronic exhibits. And making sure everyone—you, the judge, and jury—can hear what is being said is always important. It takes patience and care.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Jury Selection & Face Masks

Can I Skip Jury Duty Because of Covid Fears? - The New York Times

In State v. Bell, the WA Court of Appeals held that it does not violate a defendant’s constitutional rights for jurors to wear face masks at jury selection.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Mr. Bell was charged with first degree assault and drive-by shooting for an attack on his coworker. During jury selection, the court denied Bell’s request that jurors wear clear face shields rather than non-transparent face masks covering their noses and mouths. At trial, Mr. Bell was found guilty as charged. He appealed on arguments that the judge’s decision to deny his request for face shields violated his right to select an impartial jury.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The Court of Appeals reasoned that starting at the beginning of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Washington courts adopted a variety of strategies to ensure that trial could continue safely. The Washington State Supreme Court, in an order issued June 18, 2020, required courts to conduct all jury trial proceedings consistent with the most protective applicable public health guidance in their jurisdiction. It also ordered courts to inform jurors of steps the court would take to combat spread of the virus, including “face masking.”

“Washington was not alone in taking these steps to ensure the safety of jurors, court staff, counsel, parties, and the general public during a global health emergency. Many other jurisdictions did the same. Some of those jurisdictions have seen challenges to their pandemic-induced jury selection procedures similar to the one Bell brings. Courts have uniformly rejected these challenges.” ~WA Court of Appeals.

Ultimately, the Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Bell’s motion. “It did not adopt procedures that no reasonable person could support,” it stated. “The trial court was responsive to Bell’s concerns throughout the selection process.” The Court of Appeals emphasized that Mr. Bell had the option to conduct voir dire online if he wished. This would have permitted access to the potential jurors’ faces, albeit at the cost of some of their body language. “He did not take advantage of this option, instead requesting that jurors wear face shields,”  stated the Court of Appeals.

“Here, the trial court’s decision to require potential jurors to wear face masks may have deprived Bell of some portion of his ability to assess their demeanor. But jurors’ discomfort at being forcibly unmasked in a crowded room around a group of strangers in the midst of a pandemic may have also affected their demeanor and impeded accurate determination of their mood and credibility. And their tone of voice, body language, eyes, and other aspects of their demeanor remained as accessible as they normally would have been.” ~WA Court of Appeals.

With that, the Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when, during a pandemic, it required jurors to wear face masks during jury selection.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

WA Supreme Court on Accessing Justice During the Pandemic: “Our Work Isn’t Done.”

COVID-19 and the Courts | RAND

In a press release, the Washington Courts describe the huge strides they’ve taken to keep courts accessible and safe during the pandemic. And in doing so, the judiciary learned a great deal about everyday challenges to equity and accessing justice for state residents. WA Supreme Court Chief Steven C. González addressed the matter in a joint session of the state Legislature.

“The pandemic made clearer than ever the inequities within our justice system, but by making them more visible, the pandemic also made them more addressable,” ~WA Supreme Court Chief Steven C. González.

The speech was broadcast live and recorded by TVW. A written State of the Judiciary report was released to lawmakers, judicial branch leaders and the public following the oral address.

González highlighted some key work and responses by the judicial branch to challenges and revelations:

  • Remote proceedings, now and future – Courts have broadly expanded remote proceedings to maintain safety during the pandemic, and in doing so learned a great deal about struggles to access courts. “Remote access has relieved the burden of travel for those unable to afford child care or to take off from work. It has allowed disabled people better, more inclusive access to justice,” Justice González said. Courts have launched remote and hybrid trials, have expanded electronic filing and use of electronic signatures, and have provided remote technology to litigants who did not have it. “Some of these pandemic necessities have become so effective, we will adopt rules to make them permanent. We’re in that process now.”
  • Racial disparities remain – The Board for Judicial Administration launched a Court Recovery Task Force to catalog pandemic revelations and adaptations and provide support and information. After the killing of George Floyd, the task force expanded its work to include examination of ongoing racial disparities in the justice system. Its final report is titled, “Re-Imagining Our Courts.” Powerful data on disparities in the justice system were also detailed in reports by The Race and Justice Task Force and the Gender and Justice Commission. “This hard data reinforces what many know from their own lived experiences, but these reports give us tangible, actionable data that we can point to as we push for improvements.”
  • Making progress – González highlighted expanded access to court interpreters enabled by the legislature, expanded use of therapeutic courts across the state which have proven successful in addressing underlying causes of criminal activity, new communication channels between state branches of government such as the new Interbranch Advisory Committee, and ongoing efforts such a Washington state court rule addressing both explicit and implicit bias in jury selection – the first in the nation to do so, and now a national model.
  • Immediate challenges – In addition to other ongoing issues, González pointed to significant concerns involving court fines and fees being used to fund so much of court operations, particularly technology system, and court security risks. “All too much of the funding for our IT systems come from district and municipal court fees and fines,” he said, which criminalize poverty. “These are disparately imposed on the poorest and most marginalized communities. This needs to change. It’s the right thing to do.” Maintaining secure, safe courts is also an issue affecting access to justice and the functions of a democratic society, he said, and court security concerns and incidents have been growing.

“We’ve travelled far along the road to justice, and we still have more to go . . . We need your help to continue that progress. I look forward to working with all of you to fulfill the great promise of our  nation of equal justice for all.” ~WA Supreme Court Chief Steven C. González.

My opinion? The COVID-19 pandemic has further exposed and exacerbated inequities in our justice system. Our courts and legal service providers have been forced to curtail in-person operations. This has occurred often without the resources or technology to offer remote-access or other safe alternatives. Fortunately, our courts have takes impressive strides forward and effectively pivoted under the circumstances.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

The Increase in Gun Violence Appears To Be The “New Normal”

An expert on trends in gun sales and gun violence in pandemic America

Journalist Martin Kaste reports in NPR that shootings spiked during the Pandemic, and this appears to be the “new normal.”

Hopes for a rapid decline in the pandemic murder spike are fading. Although national statistics for 2022 aren’t yet available, an informal year-to-date tally of murders in major cities is. The total count in those cities has dipped slightly lower than last year, but it’s still well above pre-pandemic levels. And in 40% of the cities listed, homicides are trending higher.

Some of the worst trouble spots are cities such as Philadelphia and Baltimore, where year-to-date homicides are rivaling the high tallies of 2020 and 2021. In Portland, Ore., the mayor has declared an “emergency” over gun violence, as the city struggles to reel in an annual murder count that shot up to 88 in 2021, from 36 in 2019. Even some smaller cities, such as Little Rock, Ark., are in danger of eclipsing last year’s murder numbers.

The Nature of Gun Violence Has Changed

But it’s not just that the numbers remain high. The nature of the gun violence itself has changed, according to those who watch these crimes closely.

“The ’90s was more gang-oriented, there was much more organized, sort of targeted shootings . . . Today, it’s petty offenses, petty conflicts, reckless shootings.” ~King County Prosecutor Elyne Vaught

Vaught says you can see the “rise in reckless-type shootings” in the county statistics, where the number of shots fired has more than doubled, compared to the same period in 2019, and with more shots fired per victim.

According to Kaste’s article, police around the country have noticed this trend. A new report from the Major Cities Chiefs Association points to “incidents of individuals indiscriminately shooting into large crowds while discharging massive amounts of ammunition,” such as the April mass shooting in downtown Sacramento.

The chiefs point to the availability of extended ammunition magazines, as well as the growing popularity of “auto sear” switches, small after-market devices that turn semi-automatic Glock pistols into illegal automatics, capable of spraying bullets. (Similar attachments are also exist for AR-15-style rifles, but police worry more about handguns, which are used far more often in crimes.)

Gun Violence Often Starts Online

Temple University criminologist Jason Gravel, who studies how young people acquire and use guns, says the role of social media may be the biggest change of the last few recent years.

“It might look like some random shooting on the street, but if that was preceded by a bunch of verbal threats online or in social media, you don’t see the first part of the conflict, you just see the end result,” ~ Jason Gravel, Temple University Criminologist.

More Guns Are Available

There may have been more guns around for kids to find. Firearms dealers reported record sales during the pandemic, and a recent article in the Annals of Internal Medicine estimates that 2.9% of U.S. adults became new gun owners. By extension, the authors estimate 5 million children were “newly exposed” to firearms in their households.

It’s hard not to view these incidents as yet another result of America’s polarized gun debate. Many Americans hold their right to bear arms, enshrined in the US Constitution, as sacrosanct. But critics of the Second Amendment say that right threatens another: the right to life.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Firearm Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Whatcom County Jail Tightens Booking Restrictions

Riverside County jails are so crowded, car thieves and drug dealers are being sent home

Journalist David Rasbach of The Herald reports the Whatcom County Jail has stopped booking people suspected of low-level offenses.

JAIL POPULATIONS HAVE INCREASED

in a letter to local leaders, Sheriff Bill Elfo explained the main reason behind less bookings was an increase in the jail population.

“Since the beginning of 2022, populations at both the Downtown Jail and Work Center have steadily climbed despite increased booking restrictions that were put into place in October of 2021.” ~Whatcom County Sheriff Bill Elfo.

According to recent reports, the current jail population has grown 28% in the last three months. And it’s grown 44% larger than six months earlier.

Today’s population shows an increase over the previous two years during the COVID-19 Pandemic. We’re at or above the levels seen the two summers before the pandemic.

OFFENDER CHARACTERISTICS HAVE CHANGED

“In addition to the number of offenders, the characteristics of the offender population has also changed,” Elfo wrote. He states that approximately 83% of the jail population is now being held on suspicion of a pending felony offenses. Additionally, approximately 42% of the people housed in the jail have been diagnosed with a serious mental illness. Adding to the despair, 80% have an existing substance use disorder.

These behavioral issues has led to an increase in assaultive or self-harming behavior. As a result, fewer people in the jail can be housed with others.

OVERWORKED JAIL CORRECTIONS STAFF

In addition to a growing jail population, Elfo reported that workloads for corrections staff ARE stretched past all reasonable limits due to COVID protocols. There’s also an increasing need for care of vulnerable people housed in the jail, growth of the Medication for Opioid Use Disorder program, more fights and assaults among the jail population and of staff and problems created by an aging and sometimes failing facility.

Whatcom County is currently trying to fill 11 correction deputy vacancies, or approximately 16% of the full-time staff that it is budgeted for. According to Elfo, this has created the need for mandated unvolunteered overtime and mandatory callbacks to work. The current workloads, a perceived sense of apathy and new demands have taken their toll.

To help mitigate some of the challenges Elfo mentioned in the letter, he reported that Whatcom County is negotiating to contract for 45 beds in Snohomish County. Elfo wrote that he anticipated an agreement soon and would submit an interlocal agreement and supplemental budget request to the Whatcom County Executive and county council in June.

My opinion? It’s in our best interests for Whatcom County to construct a new, better jail. We must hire more jail deputies and train them to manage today’s jail population. And we must improve conditions for all, including the jail staff who oversee the incarcerated.

Buck up, taxpayers.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime and incarcerated. Making bail and hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Washington Traffic Fatalities Hit 20-Year High

US road deaths rise at record pace as risky driving persists - ABC News

Excellent artice by journalist Becca Robbins reports that Washington traffic fatalities hit a 20-year high in 2021. This comes as recent data from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission shows last year’s total traffic deaths was 633 people.

That rate outpaces 574 fatal crashes in 2020 and 538 in 2019, the agency’s data shows. Of those killed in 2021, 300 of them were drivers, 141 were pedestrians, 108 were passengers and 93 were motorcyclists.

Clark County also continued to see high rates of fatal crashes, with 36 people killed last year. In 2020, 40 people died locally in car crashes and 26 died in 2019, data from the commission shows. In the county, 13 drivers were killed in 2021, as well as 10 passengers, seven pedestrians and six motorcyclists.

The commission said in a news release that statewide data from the first quarter of this year shows 2022 is on track to surpass last year’s record rate.

It is promoting a “community-based” approach to curb the increase in fatal crashes and encourages people to talk about traffic safety with each other. The agency is beginning a summer ad campaign, which it says coincides with the time of year that sees an increase in crashes.

“The increase in deaths on our roads is tragic, but we all have the power to reverse the trend . . . Most of us use roads safely, and we can also influence the smaller number of people who engage in risky behavior. Take an extra step and help someone close to you be safe, too. It’s as simple as reminding them to buckle their seat belt or put their phone away when they drive.” ~Mark McKechnie, Director of External Relations, Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC)

Traffic deaths have spiked nationally, with nearly 43,000 people killed on U.S. roads last year, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The tally marked the highest number in 16 years.

The 10.5 percent jump over 2020 numbers was the largest percentage increase since the NHTSA began its fatality data collection system in 1975. Nearly 118 people died in U.S. traffic crashes every day last year, according to the agency’s figures.

WHY THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIS DEATHS?

The NHTSA has blamed reckless driving behavior for increases during the COVID-19 pandemic, citing behavioral research showing that speeding and traveling without a seat belt have increased. Before 2019, the number of fatalities had fallen for three straight years, The Associated Press reported.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg has pledged help and released a national strategy earlier this year, aimed at reversing the trend, which he calls a crisis. He told AP in January his department over the next two years will provide federal guidance, as well as billions in grants under President Joe Biden’s new infrastructure law, to spur states and localities to lower speed limits and embrace safer road design, such as dedicated bike and bus lanes, better lighting and crosswalks. The strategy also urges the use of speed cameras, which the department says could provide more equitable enforcement than police traffic stops.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with Reckless Driving or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Drug Overdose Deaths Hit Highest Level On Record

U.S. drug overdose deaths hit record 107,000 last year

According to provisional data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, drug overdoses in the United States were deadlier than ever in 2021.

Nearly 108,000 people died of drug overdoses in 2021, and about two-thirds of those deaths involved fentanyl or another synthetic opioid. Overdose deaths have been on the rise for years in the US, but surged amid the Covid-19 Pandemic. Annual deaths were nearly 50% higher in 2021 than in 2019, CDC data shows.

The spike in overdose deaths in the second year of the pandemic wasn’t as quite as dramatic as in the first year: Overdose deaths were up about 15% between 2020 and 2021, compared with a 30% jump between 2019 and 2020. But the change is still stark. In 2021, about 14,000 more people died of overdose deaths in than in 2020, the CDC data shows.

“This is indeed a continuation of an awful trend. Rates of overdose deaths have been on an upward climb for decades now, increasing at unprecedented rates right before the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic in the U.S.” ~Dr. Nora Volkow, director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

The pandemic accelerated trends that were already heading in the wrong direction, and experts say that reversing course will require concentrated efforts — and it will take time, both strategically and ideologically.

Treatment for drug abuse was lacking even before the pandemic. In 2019, more than 20 million people ages 12 and older reported having a substance abuse disorder, only 10% of whom reported receiving care, according to a report from the US Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

And a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation cites evidence that access and utilization of these services has gotten even worse during the pandemic.

The illicit drug supply in the US has also seen a “massive shift” over the past two decades. Increasing use of synthetic drugs caught the attention of experts before Covid-19 hit, but the pandemic may have exacerbated the problem. With international travel limited, synthetics that are easier to manufacture and more concentrated were likely more efficient to smuggle across borders, Volkow said.

Overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids such as fentanyl, psychostimulants such as methamphetamine, and cocaine all increased between 2020 and 2021, according to the new CDC data. Deaths involving natural or semi-synthetic drugs, such as prescription drugs, fell slightly from the year prior.

My opinion? This is a devastating milestone in the history of the overdose epidemic in America. When we report numbers, we must remember that each number represents an individual, their families, and their communities. Compounding the issue is the fact that the WA Supreme Court struck down Washington felony drug possession law. In the wake of the Blake decision on February 25, people can no longer be arrested for simple drug possession in Washington state.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a Drug Offense or any other crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Crowded Jail Cells

Coronavirus spreads in California prisons: Latest cases | The Sacramento Bee

Great article by senior reporter for Newsweek reports that crowded cells in jails across the U.S. could help the rapid spread of Coronavirus. Top Democratic senators have accordingly asked prison authorities to reveal what contingency plans there are to tackle any outbreak.

According to the article, The Sentencing Project has called on public officials to release people in jail who do not pose a public safety risk. This jail population includes those housed in pre-trial detention or rehabilitated people.

“Existing unsanitary and overcrowded prison and jail conditions will exacerbate the spread of the new coronavirus . . . Elderly incarcerated people often pose little public safety risk but disproportionately suffer from chronic medical conditions and thus are at the highest risk of dying from COVID-19.” ~The Sentencing Project senior research analyst Nazgol Ghandnoosh

Ghandnoosh emphasized that time is of the essence to avert a public health catastrophe in the United States’ prisons and jails.

The sentiment echoes concerns voiced by other prisoners’ rights advocates, who fear the implications the virus will have for the 2.2 million people living in the U.S. penal system.

Last week, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers president Nina Ginsberg said in a statement that, given the spread of the virus: “There is every reason to question whether American detention facilities, as a whole, are up to this challenge.”

Meanwhile, Maria Morris of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) National Prison Project wrote in an op-ed this week that jails were not closed environments, and had staff and visitors coming into the facilities and returning home, posing a considerable risk.

Also, top Democrats signed a letter asking the Federal Bureau of Prisons about its coronavirus plans. presidential contender Senator Bernie Sanders, and former primary candidates Senators Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren were among the signees. The letter, which was also addressed to prison operators GEO Group, CoreCivic, and Management and Training Corporation, asked if staff and inmates who may be vulnerable have been identified, how they will be treated if they test positive and how staff shortages caused by the virus will be dealt with.

My opinion? Kudos to those involved in these efforts. Protecting incarcerated people during a contagious health crisis by expediting releases would reduce the burden on prison staff. It would also reduce demand for limited hospital resources which are shared with the broader public.

Please read Making Bail and contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged and jailed. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

Attorney-Client Communications During COVID

Defendant in credit union robbery makes initial appearance | News, Sports, Jobs - Messenger News

This is an interesting case that arose in the early days of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In State v. Anderson, the WA Court of Appeals held that courts must try to ensure that criminal defendants are able to confidentially communicate with counsel throughout court proceedings. Failure to provide a confidential means to communicate may be grounds for reversal on appeal.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In 2016, a Franklin County jury convicted Mr. Anderson of multiple felonies including murder, assault, and unlawful possession of a firearm. Mr. Anderson received a sentence of 1,126 months’ imprisonment with 36 months’ community custody, and was assessed $75,430.49 in restitution. A portion of the restitution was imposed jointly and severally with two codefendants.

Three specific issues were identified for resentencing: a vague community custody
condition, two scrivener’s errors, and imposition of discretionary legal financial
obligations in light of Mr. Anderson’s indigence.

A re-sentencing hearing was scheduled to address some concerns Mr. Anderson raised. His resentencing took place in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. Washington’s governor declared a state of emergency on February 29, 2020. Shortly thereafter, our Supreme Court began issuing a series of emergency orders addressing court operations during the pandemic. On April 29, 2020, the Supreme Court
issued an order that specified as follows:

Courts must allow telephonic or video appearances for all scheduled criminal and juvenile offender hearings whenever possible. For all hearings that involve a critical stage of the proceedings, courts shall provide a means for defendants and respondents to have the opportunity for private and continual discussion with their attorney.

Mr. Anderson attended the May 12 resentencing hearing via video. His attorney appeared telephonically. The hearing was very brief, generating only seven substantive pages of a report of proceeding. During the hearing, there was no discussion regarding whether Mr. Anderson had consented to appear via video.

Nor was there any clarification about whether Mr. Anderson and his attorney were able to communicate throughout the hearing. The parties agreed to modify the judgment and sentence according to the three issues identified in our prior decision. When addressed by the court, Mr. Anderson confirmed he agreed with the modifications.

At the hearing’s close, the court asked Mr. Anderson if he had been able to hear and understand the proceedings. Mr. Anderson responded affirmatively, but also asked how he was supposed to pay the outstanding restitution. The court instructed Mr. Anderson to confer with his attorney. Mr. Anderson subsequently asked the court how long he had to appeal the decision. The court told him that he had 30 days to make a direct appeal, and that he should speak to his attorney regarding the process. The hearing then adjourned.

Mr. Anderson filed a timely notice of appeal. He argues the videoconference resentencing hearing deprived him of his right to be present and to confer with counsel.

COURT’S ANALYSIS & CONCLUSIONS

The Court of Appeals began by saying the right to counsel applies to all critical stages of criminal proceedings, including resentencing.

“The constitutional right to counsel demands more than just access to a warm body with a bar card,” said the Court. “Among other things, it requires individuals charged with crimes to be able to confer privately with their attorneys at all critical stages of the proceedings.” It further reasoned that the ability for attorneys and clients to consult privately need not be seamless, but it must be meaningful. “It is the role of the judge make sure that attorneys and clients have the opportunity to engage in private consultation.”

The Court relied on State v. Gonzalez-Morales, a WA Supreme Court case with similar issues. In Gonzalez-Morales, the defendant’s rights were violated when the trial court failed to give him an interpreter to communicate with his attorney.

“Mr. Anderson argues his case fails to meet the constitutional standard recognized
in Gonzales-Morales,” said the Court of Appeals. “We agree.”

“Unlike what happened in Gonzales-Morales, the trial court here never set any ground rules for how Mr. Anderson and his attorney could confidentially communicate during the hearing. Nor were Mr. Anderson and his attorney physically located in the same room, where they might have been able to at least engage in nonverbal communication.

Given Mr. Anderson participated by video from the jail and his attorney was appearing by telephone from a separate location, it is not apparent how private attorney-client communication could have taken place during the remote hearing. It is unrealistic to expect Mr. Anderson to assume he had permission to interrupt the judge and court proceedings if he wished to speak with his attorney.” ~WA Court of Appeals

Despite the communication obstacles, the Court nevertheless held Mr. Anderson was not entitled to relief because of harmless error. It also said that although Mr. Anderson was not entitled to relief, this case is a cautionary tale for trial judges administering remote criminal proceedings:

“The COVID-19 pandemic has complicated the administration of justice in innumerable ways. Videoconferencing has been an essential component of continued court operations. But courts must ensure videoconferencing occurs in a way that allows for private attorney client consultation. The best method is to arrange for attorneys and clients to be located in a shared physical space, with access to additional communication technologies (such as text messaging devices) if necessary to maintain physical distancing.”

My opinion? The COVID-19 Pandemic has certainly increased the difficulty of practicing law. Courtroom proceedings went virtual or were put on hold, causing delays in justice. Law schools and bar exams were upended. The shift was dramatic. We’ve had to learn new technologies and skills. We’ve had to revolve our practice to adhere and comply with new Executive Orders from our courts. And In the face of change and challenge, we do what American lawyers have done since lawyers helped found this country: we choose to get to work to help to solve the problems before us.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.

WA State Patrol Employees Lose Jobs For Refusing to Vaccinate

Unvaccinated Cops Should Be Fired; Use Their Salaries on Public Health

Today’s press release from the WA State Patrol reports that 127 people employed by WSP were separated from employment for refusing to get COVID-19 vaccines.

Those leaving include 67 troopers, six sergeants, one captain and 53 civil servants, according to the announcement.

The departures from the State Patrol are spread across the state. Over the next few days, leaders plan to gauge the impact of the departures and move resources where necessary. The State Patrol plans to make similar adjustments for departures from its civilian jobs and is looking to fill vacancies “as soon as possible.”

Longer term, the WSP will continue recruiting and plans to fill three classes of police academy cadets in the coming months.

WSP Chief John R Batiste said the State Patrol will do its best to keep staff from becoming overburdened from the departures. “We have the responsibilities of the agency to carry forward and I am not going to ask you to do more with less,” said Batiste in the press release.

About two weeks ago, WSP said 93 percent of its 2,200 employees had been vaccinated against COVID-19, according to the Seattle Times. Gov. Jay Inslee’s office said last week that across Washington, more than 90 percent of state workers had been vaccinated. Inslee announced in August that state employees, health care employees and school workers must be vaccinated or provide proof of medical or religious exemption by Oct. 18. According to the Associated Press, the mandate is believed to be among the strictest in the nation and covers more than 800,000 workers.

In other related news, Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said that police officers should get vaccinated against COVID-19 to protect themselves and others.

Police unions across the country have urged members to resist vaccine requirements for their jobs. But Fauci said police officers should view vaccination as a key part of their job:

“Think about the implications of not getting vaccinated when you’re in a position where you have a responsible job, and you want to protect yourself because you’re needed at your job, whether you’re a police officer or a pilot or any other of those kinds of occupations.” Dr. Anthony Fauci,  Fox News Sunday.

Please contact my office if you, a friend or family member are charged with a crime. Hiring an effective and competent defense attorney is the first and best step toward justice.