Client charged with Felony Assault in the Second Degree by Strangulation (DV) after his wife called 911 in the aftermath of an argument. Moments later, Client also called 911. Both of their 911 calls were recorded.  Client’s wife reported Client was drunk, violent, had choked her and was literally breaking down doors in an effort to reach her. In his own 911 call, Client sounded neither threatening nor violent.

When police arrived, they found no broken-down doors. They photographed only slight redness on the neck of Client’s wife. Although Client was highly intoxicated, he denied strangling his wife. He was later charged with Count I Felony Assault Second Degree by Strangulation (DV). He remembered nothing about the incident.

For over one year, Client’s criminal case went pending in the courts. During this time, the couple divorced. After their divorce was finalized, however, Client’s now-ex-wife reported she was raped by Client around the same time she was allegedly strangled by him. However, there was no evidence of her allegations. There were no witnesses or injuries. She told no friends or family. Despite the lack of evidence, Prosecutor charge Client with Count II Rape in the Second Degree by Forcible Compulsion. This is a Class A felony exposing Client to a maximum 20 years prison and lifetime registration as a sex offender.

The case proceeded to trial. Regarding the Assault by Strangulation charge, Client’s defense was Voluntary Intoxication. Regarding the rape charge, Client’s defense was denial and lack of evidence. At trial, his ex-wife’s testimony on the rape allegations was far more violent and descriptive than the story she gave police during her recorded interview. Consequently, during cross-examination Mr. Ransom successfully impeached Client’s ex-wife on her inconsistent statements pursuant to Evidence Rule 613.

Ultimately, the jury acquitted Client of Rape in the Second Degree. This was due to the lack of evidence and inconsistent statements raised by Client’s ex-wife. The jury also acquitted Client of Felony Assault by Strangulations (DV), opting instead to find him guilty of the lesser charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree (DV). This was a highly favorable 2-step reduction from a Class B felony strike offense to a gross misdemeanor.

Client charged with Assault in the Fourth Degree (DV) after his girlfriend called police in the aftermath of an argument. By the time police arrived, Client had departed the residence and was unavailable for questioning. Client’s girlfriend, however, told police she assaulted. Making matters worse, Client was already on probation for an unrelated matter. The assault charge triggered a probation violation. Therefore, Client faced a jail sentence on the probation violation if he was convicted of assault.

At trial, Client’s girlfriend recanted her story that she gave to police. She testified Client never intentionally assaulted her and she was simply jealous that Client communicated with his female friend. Despite her recantations, the trial nevertheless moved forward and the prosecution still sought a conviction on claims it had other evidence (photographs and officer testimony) to support the charges.

In an interesting turn of events, the prosecution’s cross-examination of Client opened the door for Mr. Ransom to admit favorable evidence that Client responded in Self-Defense. Opening the door is a common law legal doctrine that allows for the admission of inadmissible evidence by a party after an opposing party has “opened the door” to it by first introducing inadmissible evidence at trial. Evidence is admitted under this doctrine when timely argued by Defense Counsel and the judge deems it necessary to counter the evidence that opened the door.

Here, Mr. Ransom was allowed to admit video evidence revealing Client’s physical injuries that he sustained from his girlfriend in the aftermath of a prior unrelated incident. This video evidence revealed Client was victimized by his girlfriend in prior DV attacks. Consequently, the video supported Client’s Self-Defense defense. The jury acquitted. Thankfully, the acquittal also dismissed Client’s probation violation. All outcomes were extremely favorable.

Client charged with Assault in the Second Degree With a Deadly Weapon after being confronted by a neighbor. This is a Class B felony exposing Client to 10 years prison and a $20,000.00 fine. Making matters worse, the Deadly Weapon Enhancement exposed Client to an additional 3 years of prison if he was found guilty as charged.

Here, for months leading up to the incident, the neighbor threatened and bullied Client on many occasions. The neighbor was also much larger and outweighed Client by nearly 100 pounds.  On the date of the incident, Client was peacefully working outside when he was confronted and attacked by the neighbor. Client used a tool to defend himself against the attack. As a result, the neighbor was injured.

At trial, Client asserted Self-Defense to the charges. The jury was undecided. The judge declared a mistrial.

Client charged with DUI after bystanders called 911 to report he was doing donuts in a gravel parking lot. Upon contact, Client appeared to display mental health disorders and signs of recent alcohol consumption. Police acted quickly. Client was handcuffed, arrested and transported to the police department to undergo a BAC test. However, police conducted no field sobriety tests, portable breath tests or blood tests. Client argued with police when they read him his Implied Consent Warnings before the BAC Test was administered. Consequently, officers entered a “Refusal” DUI.

Prosecutor was unwilling to reduce the DUI due to Client’s extensive criminal history. At trial, Mr. Ransom revealed Client was confused about the Implied Consent warnings and that Client’s behavior was more consistent with mental illness than DUI. The jury could not reach a verdict. The judge declared a mistrial. Afterward, Mr. Ransom successfully negotiated a 2-step reduction of the DUI to Negligent Driving First Degree with credit for time served. Client was extremely happy with this outcome under the circumstances.

Client was charged with Rape in the Second Degree (4 Counts), Indecent Liberties and Unlawful Imprisonment. Before being charged, Client allegedly established a years-long pattern of meeting women at local bars, taking them to his home and sexually assaulting them by forcible compulsion or lack of consent due to their intoxication. Eventually, the alleged victims communicated online, formed a secret/closed Facebook group, and colluded their stories with each other before reporting to police.

Client’s numerous Class A and Class C felonies exposed him to 5-20 years life in prison on each count. Making matters worse, sex offenses “triple” offender scores under Washington’s Sentencing Guidelines. Therefore, Client faced life in prison if he was convicted of two or more charges. Mr. Ransom argued numerous pretrial motions to dismiss charges, dismiss witnesses and suppress evidence. At trial, the court dismissed one rape charge due to insufficient evidence.

Ultimately, the jury deliberated for 4 days on the remaining charges. However, they could not reach a verdict. As a result, the judge declared a mistrial. Afterward, Mr. Ransom filed a motion to change venue or dismiss the case in its entirety. The numerous pretrial motions, hung jury and post-trial motions positioned Mr. Ransom to renegotiate the case. Client accepted a highly favorable resolution involving the dismissal and reductions of numerous charges and, essentially, credit for time served in jail.

Practice Area: Federal crime

Verdict:  Guilty, Yet Prevailed at Sentencing over Government’s Recommendations

Description: Client was federally indicted with Aiding & Abetting a Felon in Possession of a Firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and § 924(a)(2). The crime is a federal felony where violators can be punished with up to ten years in prison. According to the allegations, Client was a retired mother who intentionally allowed her son, a convicted felon, to handle and possess her firearms. Tragically, Client’s son was killed during a tragic shootout with police when they tried serving a warrant for his arrest at Client’s home.

At trial, the Government produced evidence and testimony supporting their claims that Client (1) knew her son could not possess firearms, and (2) did so anyway with a criminal purpose in mind. The jury found Client guilty.

At sentencing, the Government recommended 6 months of imprisonment, 2 years of supervised release and a $5,000 fine. However, the federal judge adopted Mr. Ransom’s recommendation to give a downward departure from the sentencing guidelines and impose only 90 days of home monitoring with a $3,000.00 fine. Although Client was ultimately found guilty, the court’s sentencing was far better than the Government’s plea offer and sentencing recommendation.

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV following an altercation she had with her roommate/cousin in the laundry room. Assault Fourth Degree is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000 fine. Also, DV crimes bring enhanced penalties, limit career opportunities, bring mandatory DV treatment and disallow international travel to some countries. Making matters worse, client was already on probation for an unrelated matter. She rightfully feared serving jail time if her probation was revoked as a result of gaining another criminal conviction.

At  trial, Mr. Ransom argued the City’s witnesses lacked credibility and that its case lacked evidence. Ultimately, the jury was hung with 4 jurors acquitting and two jurors voting “Guilty.” The judge declared a mistrial. Instead of re-trying the case, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss in 6 months if Client maintained law-abiding behavior and showed proof of attending Anger Management sessions.

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence DV under RCW 9A.36.041 and Malicious Mischief Third Degree DV under RCW 9A.48.090. Here, Client allegedly destroyed her ex-boyfriend’s laptop and struck him in the face while they argued. Both crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000 fine each. Making matters worse, a conviction for DV crimes brings enhanced jail penalties, mandatory DV evaluations and treatment, mandatory probation, a court-imposed No-Contact Order with the alleged victim and loss of firearms rights.

Prosecutor refused to negotiate or resolve the charges in light of client’s prior criminal history. Also, the alleged victim insisted he was victimized throughout his relationship with Client. Nevertheless, and at trial, Mr. Ransom successfully suppressed evidence of Client’s prior bad acts and criminal convictions under Evidence Rule (ER) 404(b) and ER 609. Although the judge denied Mr. Ransom’s Self-Defense defense, Mr. Ransom successfully prevailed at trial by raising reasonable doubt to the State’s lack of evidence and the alleged victim’s lack of credibility. The jury acquitted Client under 1 hour.

Description: Client was originally charged with Rendering Criminal Assistance Second Degree under RCW 9A.76.080(2) and Making False Statements to a Public Servant under RCW 9A.76.175 (False Statements). Both crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000.00 fine each. The events surrounding Client’s charges were tragic. Law enforcement officers tried serving a bench warrant on Client’s son while he was at Client’s home.

Unfortunately, Client’s son was shot and killed by police when they attempted a highly aggressive forced entry into Client’s home. Client was subsequently arrested and charged on allegations that she lied to police about her son’s whereabouts, attempted to hide her son and was unwilling to cooperate/assist law enforcement’s efforts to detain him. Mr. Ransom argued a pretrial Knapstad Motion to dismiss all charges. The judge dismissed the Rendering Criminal Assistance charges based on a lack of evidence. Nevertheless, the judge denied Mr. Ransom’s motion to dismiss the False Statements charge.

The case proceeded to jury trial. Days before trial, Prosecutor attempted to add charges of Obstructing on the theory that Client “willfully hindered or delayed police officers in the execution of their duties.” In response, Mr. Ransom argued a motion to dismiss the Obstruction charges under Court Rule 8.4(b) on the basis that filing the charges literally days before trial was Prosecutorial Misconduct/Mismanagement which prejudiced Client’s case.

Fortunately, the judge granted Mr. Ransom’s motion to dismiss. Again, the False Statements charge proceeded to jury trial. Mr. Ransom argued that although Client’s statements to police regarding the whereabouts of her son were dishonest, the statements were not “material” because no officers reasonably relied on her statements anyway. The jury was persuaded. They acquitted Client under 30 minutes.

Description: Client charged with Child Molestation First Degree on allegations that he fondled a neighbor’s daughter. This crime is a Class A felony punishable up to a term of life imprisonment and/or $50,000 fine. It is also a “persistent offender” offense, a “strike” offense and a sex crime involving mandatory registration as a sex offender for 15 years to life.

Mr. Ransom conducted in-depth investigations of the matter before trial. He also successfully argued Motions to Compel Evidence from the Prosecutor. At trial, Mr. Ransom successfully revealed the Prosecutor’s lack of evidence and brought into question the credibility of the alleged victim and witnesses. Ultimately, the jury decided 10-2 that Client was not guilty. The judge declared a mistrial. Although Prosecutor re-filed charges, he later dismissed the case due to the jury’s overwhelming votes of “Not Guilty.”

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree under RCW 9A.36.041. Client allegedly assaulted his neighbor by taking him to the ground and restraining him during an argument. In reality, Client feared for his safety and proactively responded in Self-Defense  because his neighbor was aggressive, younger, 4-5 inches taller, outweighed client by 60 pounds and had a history of being confrontational. Nevertheless, Client’s Assault charge went to trial.

At trial, Mr. Ransom successfully suppressed all evidence which was irrelevant and prejudicial to Client’s case. During cross examination, Mr. Ransom exposed the “victim” as hostile, confrontational and financially interested in the outcome of the case because he threatened to sue Client. The jury acquitted Client of the assault charges in under 30 minutes. Furthermore, the jury entered a special verdict mandating the State to reimburse Client’s attorney’s fees. Client was extremely happy with the acquittal and reimbursement of his attorney’s fees.

Description: Client charged with two counts of Reckless Endangerment under 9A.36.050. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to a year in jail and a $5,000.00 fine. The allegations involved a dangerous “road rage” incident where Client allegedly tried to run the victims off the road with his vehicle. The victims testified they were neighbors with Client and had negative relations with him. In rebuttal, Mr. Ransom successfully revealed the lack of evidence and the questionable motives of the witnesses. The jury acquitted in 8 minutes.

Description: Client charged with Assault in the Second Degree With a Deadly Weapon (Handgun). This crime is a Class B Felony punishable up to 10 years in prison and/or $20,000.00 fine. Making matters worse, the charge is a strike offense under Washington’s 3-strike laws. Also, the Deadly Weapon sentencing enhancement automatically adds 3 additional years of prison if my client was convicted.

Here, Client tried to contact and negotiate a settlement with an unseemly character who owed him thousands of dollars. The prosecution refused to reduce the charges and/or jail time to our satisfaction. At trial, and surprisingly, the judge granted the prosecution’s motion to preclude Mr. Ransom’s Self-Defense theory. Nevertheless, Mr. Ransom convinced the jury that the prosecution lacked evidence and the witnesses were biased. The jury acquitted. Client walked out of court a free man; his bail and pistol returned to him.

Description: Client charged with Assault in the Fourth Degree in a neighborly dispute. On the day of the incident, Client and his neighbor engaged a heated argument. During the argument, the neighbor’s friend called Client’s wife an obscenity. Client approached neighbor and the neighbor’s friend and requested an apology for the name-calling. Client’s attempts to seek the apology led the “victims” to attack him. Client responded in Self-Defense. Neither the neighbor nor the neighbor’s friend were injured in any way, shape or form. Nevertheless, they called police and later sued Client in civil court.

At trial, Mr. Ransom successfully admitted collateral evidence that the neighbor and his friend sued Client and therefore stood to gain financially from a criminal conviction. This revelation seriously weakened the credibility of the alleged victims. The jury acquitted on one count. Later, the lawsuit against Client was dismissed due to the victim’s lack of injuries or damages.

Description: Client was charged with Burglary Second Degree. He ventured upon a dilapidated home which he thought was abandoned. Nobody resided at the home, the structure was in shambles, garbage littered the premises, the grass was unkempt and numerous abandoned vehicles were strewn about. Client’s occupation is metal scrapper. He was interested in seeing if the abandoned vehicles were worth salvaging. Neighbors called the police, who arrived and arrested client. Police found evidence that the back door of the home was broken into. They also found evidence of rolled up electrical wiring which they presumed came from inside the house.

Prosecutor charged client with Burglary in the Second Degree. At trial, Mr. Ransom successfully admitted the ‘lesser included” jury instruction of Criminal Trespass in the First Degree, a gross misdemeanor. This instruction allows juries to select Criminal Trespass if they find the State has not proven Burglary Second degree. More importantly, Mr. Ransom successfully introduced and admitted the “Abandoned Property” statutory defense to Criminal Trespass. He intended to provide the jury with a means of acquitting the defendant of Criminal Trespass. The jury acquitted Client of Burglary Second Degree. They found, however, that client was guilty of Criminal Trespass. Ultimately, the outcome was favorable.

Description: Client charged with Burglary First Degree, Assault Fourth Degree and Felony Violation of a No-Contact Order DV. The case originally arose from Client being charged with Assault Fourth Degree (DV) against his wife. Although he moved out of the house, the courts imposed a No-Contact Order while the case was pending. The parties consensually ignored the NCO and continued seeing each other. However, one day Client drove to the family house and found his wife in bed with another man. Client assaulted his wife’s male companion. The parties went to trial on all charges. After trial, the Prosecutor dismissed the Burglary charge after jury decided 10-2 “Not Guilty” in client’s favor. Although client was found guilty on the remaining charges, the Judge imposed only 7 days actual jail time. The remaining jail time – 5 and 3/4 months – could be served via Electronic Home Monitoring (EHM), Electronic Home Detention (EHD) or work release. In short, this favorable outcome avoided a Burglary conviction (Class B Felony), avoided prolonged jail and saved client’s employment.

Description: Client was charged with Felony Harassment (Count I) and Possession of a Weapon by a Prisoner (Count II). He was serving time at the county jail on an unrelated conviction. Unfortunately, Client was also epileptic; and wasn’t receiving his anti-seizure medications from jail nursing staff. After writing numerous complaints, Client and a nurse engage a brief argument through the “hatch” doorway of his cell. The argument was overheard by another inmate (Mr. R) who later became the Prosecution’s star witness. Mr. R informed jail staff that Client intended to kill the nurse. Later, jail staff searched Client’s jail cell and found a short toothbrush with the handle sharpened down to a wedge.

At trial, attorney Alexander Ransom successfully impeached Mr. R by revealing Mr. R’s prior crimes of dishonesty, showing numerous flaws in Mr. R’s testimony and revealing Mr. R would benefit from testifying against Client. Also, Mr. Ransom showed Client was medically diagnosed with epilepsy, experiencing seizures in jail, had never threatened the nurse, and used the toothbrush to clean debris from the walls of his cell. After four days of trial, the jury took one hour to acquit Client of all charges.

Description: Client charged with Possession of Cocaine, Bail Jumping, Witness Tampering and Intimidating a Witness. Client gave a drug-abusing friend a ride to the grocery store. Police pull client over on warrants. On the pullover, police notice “furtive movement” exchanged between Client and her friend. Police arrest both. They fail to find contraband on Client. Police question and search Client’s friend. They recover two pipes and two bindles of cocaine.

At trial, Prosecutor argued Client had constructive possession of the cocaine even though she did not possess it on her body. While the case is pending, Client failed to appear at her court hearings. Client’s explanation was that she ran out of methadone, a legal drug that many use to overcome their addiction to heroin. As a result of missing court, the State charged Client with Bail Jumping. Months later, and while the case is pending, Client unintentionally meets her “friend” on the bus. Words are exchanged. The friend later contacts the Prosecutor and says Client threatened her to not testify. The State charges Tampering With a Witness and Witness Intimidation even though there was no independent evidence. The jury agreed, and ruled “not guilty.”

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV in a circumstance involving her ex-husband. Client allegedly slapped and pushed him during a heated argument involving child custody. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the alleged victim provoked the attack. At trial, the jury acquitted Client of the charges and upheld Client’s Self-Defense arguments and found the alleged victim instigated incident.

Description: Client was charged with Reckless Driving, a gross misdemeanor. If convicted, the crime carries a 30-day license suspension. Officer believed Client posed “willful and wanton disregard for the safety of people and property” when he drove around and passed a slower-moving truck. At trial, however, Mr. Ransom revealed the Prosecutor lacked evidence that Client’s driving put anyone at risk. Client’s girlfriend, who was a passenger in his vehicle, testified that Client’s driving was not dangerous. She never feared for her safety or the safety of others. The jury acquitted in 1.5 hours.

Description: Client was a Russian immigrant charged with DUI (Refusal). Her first language was Russian. On the night of the incident, she was drove her daughter’s boyfriend’s car to work. It was a car she had never driven before with a defective taillight. More unfortunate, the car stalled because it was a stick shift vehicle with a defective clutch. Trooper pulled Client over. He believed he smelled “fruity alcohol” on Client’s breath. After arrest, the trooper drove Client to police station for a BAC breath test. The communication broke down quickly and drastically. Trooper entered a “Refusal” DUI. At trial, the jury found the trooper rushed the DUI process and failed to clearly communicate with Client. They acquitted.

Description: Client faced one count of Malicious Mischief Third Degree DV. He allegedly struck a wall with his fist and damaged it while arguing with his wife and son. At trial, Client testified to lack of intent and said his hand accidentally struck the wall while he was gesticulating rapid hand movements. The Prosecutor tried to admit never-before-seen photos of the damaged wall. However, the evidence was suppressed under CrR 4.7 defense motion because the Prosecutor failed to disclose the pictures until the day of trial. Prosecutor was severely admonished by the judge for the discovery violation.

Description: Client was charged with Felony Harassment and two counts of Assault Fourth Degree. The incident involved a confrontation between client and numerous grocery store employees who refused to sell him alcohol. The case was tried before a 12-person jury. Numerous obstacles arose throughout trial. In short, because client chose not to testify, the trial judge refused to allow Mr. Ransom to argue Self-Defense. Despite these obstacles, the jury acquitted on the Assault charges and was undecided on the Felony Harassment charge. The hung jury resulted in a mistrial.

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV, Interfering With a 911 Call DV and Malicious Mischief DV following an argument between herself and her fiancé. Mr. Ransom convinced the jury that Client responded in Self-Defense and had no intention of stopping her fiancé from calling police. Client’s case was acquitted due to lack of evidence.

Description: Client was charged with Theft Third Degree, a gross misdemeanor, for allegedly stealing furniture from a garage sale. The jury saw a lack of evidence to the charge and general lack of intent on the part of client. She testified to paying for the furniture, which was openly loaded into her van by citizens working the garage sale. As a result, the jury acquitted client.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.20.2024

Client is a first-generation immigrant of Asian descent. She is also the mother of a teenage son raised in America. One night, Client’s teenage son engaged a heated argument with Client’s husband, who is also the son’s father. In response to what Client perceived to be a gross disrespect – and in order to stop/prevent a further escalation of the building physical confrontation between father and son – Client allegedly stepped into the argument and struck her son. He called police. Client was arrested and charged with DV Assault. The judge imposed a pretrial No-Contact Order.

Mr. Ransom’s investigations and client meetings made it clear that Client’s acculteration was a strong social dynamic at play. Client’s strict upbringing in Asia strongly influenced her parenting style. She saw her physical response toward her son’s aggressions as normal, appropriate and lawful discipline. Although American law allows parents to physically discipline their children, a jury trial was nevertheless risky because juries are extremely wary toward accusations of child abuse. On Mr. Ransom’s advice, Client attended a DV Victim Impact Panel, underwent short-term Parent Counseling and completed an Anger Management course.

When interviewed, Client’s son said he wanted the No-Contact Order rescinded and the charges dismissed. His interview also opened the trial defenses of Acting on Appearances, No Duty to Retreat, Lawful Physical Discipline of a Child and Defense of Others. Given Client’s efforts toward self-rehabilitation and the strong trial defenses, Prosecutor dismissed the charges and rescinded the No-Contact Order. Client was reunited with her family.

Case Conclusion Date: 6.6.2024

While pregnant, Client engaged a Road Rage debacle with another female driver. During a tense standoff at a stoplight, Client opened the alleged victim’s car door, screaming threats and obscenities. The confrontation ended with Client’s husband de-escalating the situation. Nevertheless, Client was charged with Harassment. Mr. Ransom’s investigations showed the alleged victim had numerous traffic violations for speeding. On Mr. Ransom’s advice, Client enrolled in online Anger Management and Defensive Driving classes. The totality of the bizarre circumstances, Client’s lack of criminal history and her willingness to take accountability persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss. Client was extremely pleased her criminal record remained unblemished.

Case Conclusion Date: 5.24.2024

Police pulled Client over. Client was waiting at an intersection to execute a left turn. The officer’s rationale for the pullover was that Client appeared distracted. Upon pullover, police immediately conducted a DUI investigation. The officer searched Client’s car and found empty containers of Narcan, a medicine that rapidly reverses an opioid overdose. The officer also found Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid dependence. Client admitted he recently using Narcan to overcome the effects of recent fentanyl use. Despite his admissions, Client passed his field sobriety tests and appeared altogether sober. Nevertheless, the officer obtained a search warrant for Client’s blood. These samples were sent to the WA State Patrol Toxicology Lab for testing.

More that one year passed since the incident. Neither the prosecution nor the defense obtained Client’s blood test results.

Mr. Ransom filed pre-trial motions to (1) dismiss the DUI due to the Toxicology Lab’s  delays in producing blood test evidence, and (2) suppress the officer’s Dash-Cam video due to the officer’s failure to follow protocol and properly advise Client the Dash-Cam was recording. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 5.22.2024

Client was involved in a toxic relationship with his wife. They were approaching divorce. At one point, she called police after an argument. She said Client threatened to kill her in a very bizarre manner. When Client was contacted by police, he verified an argument took place with his wife. However, he downplayed the seriousness of his threats as unintended and unrealistic. Nevertheless, Client was charged and arrested with Felony Harassment, a Class C Felony.

Client’s family retained Mr. Ransom. During Client’s first court appearance, the Judge granted Mr. Ransom’s Motion to Release Property. This allowed Client to have law enforcement’s assistance in recovering Client’s personal effects from the family home. Later, Mr. Ransom filed a Knapstad Motion to Dismiss pursuant to the WA Court of Appeals’ newly-decided State v. Beal. This case upheld the U.S. Supreme Court’s approach in Counterman v. Colorado and adopted a subjective “true threat” standard. Under this new standard, Client’s case was dismissible because his threats to his wife were highly absurd and clearly not serious under the circumstances.

Ultimately, Mr. Ransom’s pre-trial motions opened friendly negotiations with the Prosecutor. The parties decided to resolve by entering a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) Agreement. This resolution is a long-term continuance allowing a full dismissal of the charges if Client simply avoids more criminal charges for 18 months. Along with successfully negotiating the SOC Agreement, Mr. Ransom persuaded the Judge and Prosecutor to Modify Client’s Pre-Trial Release Conditions. This allows Client to live and work outside the County’s jurisdiction. Client was extremely satisfied.

Case Conclusion Date: 5.7.2024

Police arrived at Client’s home in response to a Welfare Check from neighbors. While there, police talked to Client’s wife. She was highly intoxicated. Her wrist hurt in the aftermath of an argument with Client. Police spoke to Client. He admitted to restraining his wife because her alcohol abuse spiraled out of control and resulted in a physical altercation. Police arrested Client.

Mr. Ransom’s investigations found that Client’s wife had drug addictions and suicidal ideations. When interviewed, she admitted to drinking heavily the night before. With her cooperation, Mr. Ransom succeeded in rescinding the No-Contact Order. This allowed Client to return home shortly after the incident took place. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 2.8.2024

Client owned a large house. From the kindness of his heart, he rented numerous bedrooms of his house to the houseless community. He lived on-site in the master bedroom and managed his property. Unfortunately, his relationships with his tenants deteriorated and became quite toxic. These tenants provoked Client into physical altercations, colluded with one another and fabricated numerous false criminal charges. Their plans fulfilled a larger, more sinister attempt to eject Client from his own home and squat within Client’s property without paying rent.

Client was jailed and charged with numerous crimes. Making matters worse, he was unable to return to his house and/or retake his property due to No-Contact Orders entered against him while his cases were pending in court. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom’s investigations – consisting of witness interviews, public disclosure requests, social media investigations and computer forensics – exposed the alleged victims’ collusions and sinister schemes. Many of the alleged victims faced credibility issues and were impeachable at trial. Prosecutor was persuaded to reduce and/or dismiss numerous charges. The alleged victims moved out. Client reclaimed his property.

Case Conclusion Date: 1.30.2024

Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence (DV) under RCW 9A.36.041 and Interfering With the Reporting of a 911 DV Call under RCW 9A.36.150. following an argument between himself and his wife. Both charges are gross misdemeanors punishable up to a year in jail each and $5,000.00 fine. Because the incident involved DV charges, a conviction would prohibit Client from continuing to own or possess his firearms. He would also get terminated from his volunteer activities with the local fire department.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom worked diligently to resolve Client’s case favorably and avoid a jury trial. Together, Mr. Ransom and Client’s wife successfully rescinded the No-Contact Order. They also drafted a persuasive letter to the Prosecutor stating the incident was a misunderstanding, and that Client’s wife wanted all charges dismissed.

Eventually, the Prosecutor was persuaded to dismiss the Interfering w/ Reporting of 911 Call (DV) and reduce the Assault Fourth Degree (DV) to Disorderly Conduct (non-DV). Also, Client was allowed to complete an online DV Moral Reconation Therapy program. This resolution avoided a risky jury trial, avoided a jail sentence and avoided DV convictions. Client was allowed to continue working his job without interruption, maintain his positive standing in the fire department and continue owning/possessing firearms.

Case Conclusion Date: 1.18.2024

Client charged with Unlawful Imprisonment (DV), a Class C Felony, and Assault Fourth Degree (DV), a gross misdemeanor, following an argument he had with his wife. During the argument, Client badly wanted to immediately resolve the situation. He insisted on discussing a resolution, however, his wife wanted time and space away from the situation. One of their children called police. On arrival, police contacted all parties. While distressed, Client’s wife told police she felt trapped during the argument. Client was arrested for the crimes – which came with a Domestic Violence (DV) designation – and booked into jail. Client’s wife did not intentionally want her husband arrested. Early in the proceedings, Mr. Ransom persuaded the court to rescind the No-Contact Order. This allowed Client to move back to his home and reside with the family. Also, Client followed Mr. Ransom’s legal advice to enroll in a treatment program. For months, Client successfully complied with his treatment program and showed proof through progress reports. He also avoided more criminal charges. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 1.10.2024

Client was charged with Aiming/Discharging Firearm (X2) and Reckless Endangerment (X2). All charges are gross misdemeanors. Client risked losing his gun rights, serving a jail sentence and paying court fines if convicted. Here, Client unlawfully discharged his pistol in his apartment located downtown in a densely populated area. Neighbors called 911. Upon arrest, police officers noted Client was experiencing a mental health episode.

Client confirmed his long-standing history of mental health struggles. Making matters more complicated, Client moved out of WA State soon after getting arrested and charged. Client was unable to physically attend his court hearings. Despite these challenges, Mr. Ransom obtained Client’s mental health records/diagnosis, appeared at Client’s court hearings numerous times on Client’s behalf and appraised all parties of Client’s whereabouts. Consequently, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a dismissal of all charges via Stipulated Order of Continuance. Under the stipulations, Client was required to complete a Firearms Safety Training Course, enroll in counseling/treatment and avoid additional criminal charges for a period of 2 years. Client successfully completed his obligations and avoided more criminal charges. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.10.2023

Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree against her son-in-law. The crime is a Domestic Violence (DV) charge exposing defendants to a year in jail, $5,000.00 fine and other DV-related consequences.

Here, Client graciously opened her home to her daughter and son-in-law, who were in financial straits. Unfortunately, on the night of the incident, the son-in-law drank alcohol and consumed drugs. An argument ensued. The son-in-law invaded Client’s personal space. He yelled in Client’s face and became extremely agitated. In response. Client kicked the son-in-law in order to gain space and defend herself from possibly being attacked.  The son-in-law called police. Client was arrested.

Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the son-in-law had criminal history consisting of assaults and drug charges. Later, the son-in-law obtained a bench warrant for failing to appear at an unrelated court hearings involving DV charges levied against him from another jurisdiction.

Strategically, the best defense was a good offense. Mr. Ransom confirmed a jury trial. Given the son-in-law’s active bench warrant, it seemed highly unlikely he would appear in court to testify. And even if he appeared/testified, his bad acts were possibly admissible as impeachment evidence under the WA Rules of Evidence ER 608, ER 609 and ER 404(B). Finally, Client had strong substantive trial defenses to include Self-Defense, Acting on Appearances, and No Duty to Retreat. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: September 21, 2023

Client and the alleged victim (AV) were in a dating relationship. While dating, Client kept many of her belongings in AV’s apartment. Unfortunately, their relationship began to sour. On the day of the incident, Client arrived at AV’s apartment. However, AV refused to let her inside. This angered Client. She ended their relationship as they yelled at one another through the apartment door. Client demanded AV return her belongings inside the AV’s apartment. However, the AV refused to give Client her belongings.

Client believed the AV would destroy her belongings or never return them to her. Client kicked the apartment door down in order to retrieve her belongings. The AV called police. Client was arrested. She was charged with Domestic Violence (DV) crimes to include COUNT I Residential Burglary, a Class B felony exposing her to 10 years prison and a $20,000.00 fine, and COUNT II Malicious Mischief Third Degree, a gross misdemeanor exposing her to 1 year of jail and $5,000.00 fine.

Fortunately, Client had a viable defense of Necessity. This substantive defense may exist if the defendant reasonably believes that the commission of a crime (here, Residential Burglary) was necessary to avoid or minimize a harm (here, the AV keeping or destroying Client’s property). Also, the Prosecutor lacked evidence that Client intended to commit a crime when she kicked down AV’s door. Client merely intended to rightfully retrieve her belongings after the couple broke up. Finally, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed AV was not motivated to prosecute Client. AV was persuaded to “Let Bygones Be Bygones” and pay for the damage to his apartment door. Case dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: July 26, 2023

Client and victim met on a dating app called Tinder. On their first date, they engaged in sexual acts. On their second date, Client was invited to the victim’s dormitory. While there, they engaged in more sexual acts. At some point, the victim made it abundantly clear she wanted to stop sexual activities. Client acknowledged her decision and quickly departed the dormitory. One month later, the victim reported to police she was raped by Client. Police contacted Client. Although he confirmed some of the victim’s story, he denied sexually assaulting her.

Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the victim suffered from mental health issues. When interviewed, she disclosed suffering trauma from prior sexual assaults, some of them involving other men she met on Tinder. She also disclosed she wanted to move on with her life. She seemed disinterested in pursuing a full-blown criminal prosecution. Nevertheless, she was willing to testify for the Prosecution if Client “refused to take any accountability for his actions” (her words).

Despite the State’s lack of independent evidence, a jury trial was inherently risky. Client’s voluntary statements were admissible at trial and potentially incriminating. Even worse, conducting trial allowed Prosecutor to amend the current charge and/or add more serious sexual assault charges. Although the Consent Defense exists for upper-level felony sex charges, Client’s risk exposure to amended charges involved years of prison and a lifetime of mandatory registration as a sex offender.

Consequently, Mr. Ransom entered favorable negotiations. The plea bargain involved reducing Client’s felony Rape Third Degree charge to Criminal Attempt, a gross misdemeanor. Client received no jail, minimum fines, and no parole monitoring by the Department of Corrections.

Case Conclusion Date: July 14, 2023

Client secretly video-taped his girlfriend’s minor daughter while she bathed. The video was discovered by Client’s girlfriend. She deleted the video, destroyed the recording device and called police. When police arrived, Client gave incriminating statements. Later, Prosecutor charged Client with two serious sex offenses. Client faced years in prison if convicted as charged. He also faced a lifetime of registering as a sex offender.

Despite the challenges,  Mr. Ransom filed Knapstad Motions to Dismiss the allegations. Fortunately, these pre-trial motions opened favorable negotiations with Prosecutor. Client’s Voyeurism charge was reduced to Disclosing Intimate Images. This charge is an unranked low-level felony and is not a sex offense. Also, Prosecutor fully dismissed the Dealing in Depictions of Minor Engaged in Sexually Explicit Conduct charge. This favorable resolution avoided  sex offense registration, years of prison and mandatory parole monitoring by the Department of Corrections.

Case Conclusion Date: June 6, 2023

While boating, Client accidentally crashed his vessel into another vessel, causing extensive property damage. Police were summoned. They boarded Client’s boat. Client appeared intoxicated. A physical altercation ensued. Client uttered threats to the officers as they physically restrained him. They obtained a sample of his blood. The blood sample was presumably sent to the WA State Patrol Toxicology Lab for analysis. At first, Prosecutor wanted Client to plead guilty to all charges and serve 90 days of jail.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom worked hard to re-frame the narrative, build substantive defenses, mitigate jail exposure and negotiate a favorable resolution. Ultimately, Mr. Ransom’s efforts were fruitful. He assembled a merit package consisting of numerous character reference letters and proof of drug/alcohol treatment. Next, Mr. Ransom litigated dismissing the charges because the WA State Patrol failed to produce evidence of the blood test results. All the while, Mr. Ransom maintained friendly negotiations with Prosecutor.

The combination of these proactive measures was highly effective. As a result, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to (1) reduce all felonies to gross misdemeanors and (2) have Client’s jail sentence served on a SCRAM ankle bracelet. All of this was conditioned on Client paying for the property damage to victim’s damaged vessel. Client’s Felony Harassment charge was effectively negotiated for dismissal.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.30.2022

Client was charged with Felony Harassment following an argument with his fiancée. He uttered emotionally charged words with veiled threats and insinuations of violence. His fiancée never contacted police. However, overly concerned family members contacted a local crisis line which reported the incident to police. One week later, police officers arrived at Client’s and fiancée house and arrested Client. His fiancée protested the arrest and told officers she neither felt threatened nor unsafe during their argument. Nevertheless, Client was arrested because Washington’s DV laws require mandatory arrest under these circumstances.

Client’s fiancée made it clear to Prosecutor that she wanted the charges dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Also, Mr. Ransom filed a Knapstad Motion to Dismiss. The fiancée’s demand for dismissal and the lack of evidence opened favorable negotiations with the Prosecutor.

Client was accepted into Mental Health Court (MHC). This is a therapeutic court designed to provide wraparound support and intervene when someone’s mental health challenges have brought them into the judicial system. Even better, Client’s case shall be fully dismissed under a 1-year Stipulated Order of Continuance if he successfully completes MHC’s treatment program and avoids new criminal charges. Client was reunited with his family, avoided criminal convictions, avoided a jail sentence and maintained his employment.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.23.2022

Client was charged with Criminal Trespass, Malicious Mischief and Possession of Paraphernalia. The cases were challenging because all incidents took place on different dates and spanned numerous court jurisdictions. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom artfully negotiated a global dismissal of all charges through each jurisdiction’s Community Court. A community court is an alternative problem-solving court. It differs from traditional court in that it seeks to identify and address the underlying challenges of court participants that may contribute to further criminal activity. Its goal is to build stronger and safer neighborhoods and reduce recidivism. Here, Client made numerous strides and improvements in his life in order to get the charges dismissed. This was an excellent resolution.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.16.2022

Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree against her ex-husband. The crime is a Domestic Violence (DV) charge exposing defendants to a year in jail, $5,000.00 fine and other DV-related consequences. Here, Client arrived at her ex-husband’s home to pick up their child in common. Although the pick-up was earlier confirmed over the phone, the ex-husband changed his mind when Client arrived. The two argued. Ex-husband got in Client’s face and personal space. He also pushed Client. At this point, Client immediately feared for her safety. She physically responded to ex-husband’s aggressions and departed. There were no witnesses. Ex-husband called police.

Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the ex-husband was extremely vindictive. He inundated Client with numerous inflammatory emails. He also had pending criminal charges of his own. If he testified, his bad acts were possibly admissible as impeachment evidence under the WA Rules of Evidence ER 608, ER 609 and ER 404(B). Also, Client had strong substantive trial defenses to include Self-Defense, Acting on Appearances, and No Duty to Retreat.

Prosecutor agreed to reduce Client’s Assault charge to a low-level Disorderly Conduct (non-DV). This reduction saved Client’s career. Even better, the Disorderly Conduct conviction gets dismissed under a 12-month Deferred Sentence.

Case Conclusion Date: 6.24.2022

Client charged with Firearm Offenses to include Attempted Unlawful Possession of a Firearm Second Degree and False Swearing. Both crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to 1 year in jail and a $5,000.00 fine. Here, Client unintentionally tried to unlawfully purchase a firearm. He mistakenly believed that a pending Assault Fourth Degree (DV) charge from  a different court was dismissed. The pending DV charge prevented him from owning or possessing firearms.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom provided court records which proved Client’s innocence. The court records revealed that although Client’s pending DV charge was scheduled for dismissal due to the successful completion of his Deferred Prosecution Agreement, the dismissal hearing was stricken and postponed during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Client’s misunderstanding were further justified due to an accidental Scrivener’s Error and the subsequent failure to notify him of his re-scheduled hearing. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 6.7.2022

Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree against her ex-boyfriend. The crime is a Domestic Violence (DV) charge exposing defendants to a year in jail, $5,000.00 fine and other DV-related consequences. Here, the ex-boyfriend informed police that Client punched him and tried taking his cell phone away. Police photographed his injuries. However, police also photographed old bruising on the defendant’s arms. Apparently, the bruising was caused by a prior physical altercation with the ex-boyfriend. Regardless of who was truly primary aggressor, the two were clearly in a DV relationship.

Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the ex-boyfriend was later convicted of Felony Possession of a Stolen Motor Vehicle. He also had a recent prior Assault Fourth Degree (DV) conviction against the defendant. If he testified, his prior convictions and other bad acts were possibly admissible as impeachment evidence under the WA Rules of Evidence ER 608, ER 609 and ER 404(B).

The alleged victim did not want to testify. Nevertheless, during negotiations, Prosecutor threatened to conduct jury trial without the ex-boyfriend’s testimony or presence  and admit into evidence the ex-boyfriend’s 911 call to police. However, Mr. Ransom countered that if the case proceeded to trial without the ex-boyfriend, then Ransom would object to the admission of the 911 recording under Crawford v. Washington and request dismissal of the charges under the 6^th Amendment, which guarantees that defendants have a right to confront witnesses. Prosecutor was persuaded to dismiss.

Case Conclusion Date: 5.17.2022

Client was charged with No-Contact order Violation against her ex-boyfriend. The crime is a Domestic Violence (DV) charge exposing defendants to a year in jail, $5,000.00 fine and other DV-related consequences. Here, the ex-boyfriend informed police that Client was text-messaging him through a money transfer app called CashApp. The ex-boyfriend also gave police screenshots that allegedly showed other recent text-message conversations between himself and Client.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the ex-boyfriend’s allegations were a vindictive ruse. First, Client never texted ex-boyfriend through CashApp. Their CashApp account was established long before the No-Contact order Violation charge was filed, and CashApp includes automated text-messaging between participants. Second, the ex-boyfriend could not provide specific dates of the other allegedly recent screenshot conversations between himself and Client. Furthermore, the ex-boyfriend recently pled guilty to DV charges against Client in another jurisdiction. His prior conviction and other bad acts against Client were possibly admissible as impeachment evidence under the WA Rules of Evidence ER 608, ER 609 and ER 404(B). Consequently, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss.

Case Conclusion Date: 5.3.2022

Client was charged with No-Contact Order Violation (DV) from an alleged phone incident involving his ex-girlfriend. Here, Client’s ex-girlfriend ended the romantic relationship with Client and successfully obtained a No-Contact Order (NCO) afterward. Among other things, the NCO prohibited Client from communicating with his ex-girlfriend through third parties. Client’s ex-girlfriend lived with her mother. Unfortunately, soon after the court hearing, the mother received a ranting, incomprehensibe and offensive voicemail from Client. Client’s mother called police. Accordingly, Client was charged with NCOV (DV).

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom prevailed in getting the charges dismissed. His investigations revealed Client was previously diagnosed with ADHD, Asperger Syndrome, Social Anxiety, Depression and Seasonal Affective Disorder. Eventually, Mr. Ransom convinced Prosecutor that Client’s ranting phone call was truly a directionless psychological episode. Under the circumstances, it was questionable whether the phone call was specific to the ex-girlfriend and/or an intentional violation of the NCO. Client’s possible Diminished Capacity defense persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss the charges under a Stipulated Order of Continuance. Client’s case was dismissed after he avoided additional criminal charges for 6 months.

Case Conclusion Date: 4.28.2022

Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree (DV) from an incident involving his son. Video evidence of the incident was retrieved from Client’s home security cameras. The video showed Client physically restraining his minor son during an argument. A family member called police. Making matters worse, at first the prosecution was unwilling to negotiate a dismissal because of Client’s lengthy criminal history.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom worked hard to obtain a favorable resolution. His public disclosure investigations revealed Client’s son had a history of violently acting out toward teachers, school staff and law enforcement. The evidence was admissible at trial under the substantive defenses of Self-Defense and Physical Discipline of a Child. Later, Mr. Ransom assembled a Merit Package consisting of a Client’s Anger Management Evaluation, proof of treatment, progress reports and parenting classes. Later still, Mr. Ransom successfully rescinded the No-Contact Order between Client and his son. Eventually, Prosecutor was persuaded to dismiss the case under a Stipulated Order of Continuance. This resolution allows dismissal if Client avoids additional criminal charges for 1 year and pays a $200.00 court fine.

Case Conclusion Date: 4.20.2022

Description: Client faced numerous Domestic Violence (DV) charges against his wife.  The seriousness of the allegations was stark. By itself, Assault Second Degree is violent Class B Felony strike offense exposing Client to 10 years of prison and a $20,000.00 fine. Making matters worse, If Client was convicted – or even formally arraigned, for that matter – he risked immediate termination of his employment.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom immediately executed a plan of action seeking favorable reductions and/or dismissals of the charges and the preservation of Client’s employment. He advised Client of treatment options,  assisted in modifying the No-Contact Order (NCO) to allow Client to communicate with his wife, drafted a merit package to Prosecutor supported by Client’s evaluations, treatment and progress reports, made significant inroads for Client to get accepted into Mental Health Court and engaged an intense pattern of high-pressure negotiations with the prosecution. Thankfully, Client’s wife was fully engaged in this process. She made it clear to Prosecutor that she wanted the charges dismissed and the NCO rescinded. Eventually, Prosecutor was persuaded to strike Client’s Arraignment, dismiss the felonies and re-file misdemeanor charges.  Furthermore, Client was accepted into Mental Health Court to monitor his ongoing treatment. Client was reunited with his family, avoided felony convictions, avoided a jail sentence and maintained his employment.

Case Conclusion Date: 2.07.2022

Description: Client was accused of Malicious Mischief Third Degree after getting intoxicated and smashing a car window. At first, the Prosecutor wanted Client to plead guilty as charged, serve 2 days jail, pay a $300 fine and pay restitution to the victim. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom contacted the alleged victim and persuaded her to dismiss the case under a Compromise of Misdemeanor. This legal instrument allows dismissal of property crimes under RCW 10.22 if the defendant agrees to pay a satisfactory amount in restitution to the victim. All parties were happy with the outcome. Client  maintained his clean criminal record free of any criminal convictions.

Case Conclusion Date: 8.31.2021

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence (DV) after becoming intoxicated and engaging a physical incident with the mother of his children. She contacted police. They arrived, arrested Client for Assault and took him to jail. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom’s investigations and advice brought favorable results. Client obtained an alcohol evaluation and immediately engaged a rigorous treatment program. Also, the alleged victim wanted the No-Contact rescinded and the case dismissed.

Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a dismissal under a Stipulated Order of Continuance Agreement with the Prosecutor. This gives Client an opportunity for the Assault charges to get dismissed if he pays a small court fine, completes a treatment program and avoids future criminal charges. The judge also granted Mr. Ransom’s Motion to Rescind the No-Contact Order between Client and the mother of his children.

Case Conclusion Date: 8.26.2021

Description: Client was accused of Rendering Criminal Assistance Second Degree, a simple misdemeanor punishable up to 90 days jail and $1,000.00 fine. Here, Client’s son had active warrants for his arrest. He was actively avoiding law enforcement. Client lived on a large property with woods. On the day of the incident, police received a tip that Client’s son was camping on Client’s wooded property.  Police arrived. They discovered Client’s son hiding in the woods. Police confronted Client. She denied knowing Client was camping on her wooded property. Nevertheless, police arrested Client and charged her with Rendering Criminal Assistance in the Second Degree.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom drafted a Knapstad Motion to Dismiss and a Motion to Sever Co-Defendant Trials.  Before the motion hearing, Mr. Ransom approached Prosecutor and effectively negotiated a dismissal based on Client’s lack of criminal history and the Prosecutor’s lack of evidence on intent.

Case Conclusion Date: 8.25.2021

Description: Client was accused of No-Contact Order Violation (DV), a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 fine, DV evaluations/treatment, probation and loss of gun rights. Here, Client ventured to his old high school to get transcripts for college admissions. He was joined by his mother. Unfortunately, Client forgot his ex-girlfriend still attended the same high school. Months earlier, they had a nasty breakup. After the breakup she obtained a No-Contact Order prohibiting Client from going anywhere near her school, work or home. Ex-Girlfriend saw Client sitting in the school counselor’s office with his mother. Police were called. By the time they arrived, Client departed the school with his mother. Police mailed Client a citation and court summons.

Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom investigated the matter and persuaded all parties that the incident was an unintentional violation of the No-Contact Order. This was supported by the school counselor indicating that Client did, in fact, make an appointment to retrieve his transcripts.  Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 8.23.2021

Description: Client was accused of Assault in the Fourth Degree (DV), a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 fine, DV evaluations/treatment, No-Contact Orders, probation and loss of gun rights. Here, on the night of the incident, Client engaged a verbal argument with his teenage daughter at his home. The daughter’s boyfriend involved himself in the altercation. It became physical. During the melee, Client’s daughter deployed pepper-spray to Client’s face. Police were summoned. Client was arrested. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom persuaded all parties that the incident was minor and due to a stressful living environment. Client’s daughter and her boyfriend moved out of the house. Later, they provided a statement saying they did not want to prosecute Client. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 8.19.2021

Description: Client was accused of Assault in the Fourth Degree (DV), a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 fine, DV evaluations/treatment, No-Contact Orders, probation and loss of gun rights. Here, on the night of the incident, Client’s wife – the alleged victim – experienced a Bipolar episode. She destroyed property inside the house and attacked Client. Neighbors called police. Client was arrested. His defense was Self-Defense and Defense of Property.

On the day of trial, the Prosecution informed all parties that it failed to establish any contact with the alleged victim. Nevertheless, the Prosecution sought trial on the testimony of a neighbor who called police and overheard the alleged victim yelling. The judge struck trial, continued the case, scheduled a date for pretrial motions and ordered the Prosecutor to set up an interview between the alleged victim and Defense Counsel.

Prosecutor failed to locate the alleged victim and set up the interview. Consequently, Mr. Ransom drafted and argued a Motion to Suppress evidence (the testimony of the neighbor) and a Motion to Dismiss the charges under Crawford v. Washington, a U.S. Supreme Court case which ruled that the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause gives defendants the right to confront witnesses and cross-examine their testimony. The judge granted the Motion to Suppress and dismissed the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 8.2.2021

Description: Client was accused of Assault in the Second Degree (DV) by Strangulation/Suffocation, a Class B “strike offense” felony punishable up to 10 years prison, $20,000.00 fine and mandatory DOC/Parole monitoring. Here, Client allegedly became intoxicated and strangled his minor son during a heated argument. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom’s investigations returned evidence that (1) CPS closed the investigation as “unfounded”, (2) Client responded in Self-Defense to his son’s aggressions, and (3) Client’s son ultimately wanted the case dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Consequently, Mr. Ransom successfully negotiated a 2-step reduction to Assault in the Fourth Degree with dismissal of the Domestic Violence designation. The resolution involved no jail, no evaluations, no probation and no No-Contact Order. This was a very favorable resolution with an extremely light sentence. Client avoided a risky  jury trial, felony convictions, evaluations, treatment, probation/parole monitoring, DV convictions and No-Contact Orders.

Case Conclusion Date: 7.22.2021

Description: Client was accused of Felony Eluding a Pursuing Police Vehicle, a Class C felony punishable up to 5 years prison, $10,000.00 fine and revocation of Driver’s License. Here, sheriff deputies pursued Client’s vehicle driving north on I-5 highway in excess of 113 mph. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom created an impressive Merit Package. Client also completed an online Traffic Safety Class from the National Traffic Safety Institute. Consequently, Mr. Ransom successfully negotiated dismissal of the Felony Eluding charges in Superior Court in exchange for the re-filing of misdemeanor Reckless Driving charges in District Court. This dismiss/re-file procedure allowed Client to serve her 30-day jail sentence on Electronic Home Monitoring, which was an option previously unavailable to Client on her Felony Eluding charge. Client’s resolution also avoided probation and prevented her driver’s license from being revoked.

Case Conclusion Date: 3.23.2021

Description: Client was accused of Possession of Methamphetamine, a Class C felony punishable up to 5 years prison and a $10,000.00 fine. She was a passenger in a vehicle which was pulled over and searched. Methamphetamine was found in the vehicle. Everyone in the vehicle was charged with Possession of Methamphetamine. In State v. Blake, however, the Washington Supreme Court recently struck down Washington’s strict liability Drug Possession law as unconstitutional. Mr. Ransom researched the Blake decision and found it applicable to Client’s factual circumstances. Mr. Ransom drafted/filed a Motion to Dismiss, contacted Prosecutor and engaged a lengthy discussion about the Blake decision.  Prosecutor dismissed the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 3.18.2021

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence (DV) after becoming jealous with his then-girlfriend’s text messaging to her friends. The two wrestled on the bed over her phone. She calls police. Client is arrested and charged. After intensive negotiations, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a reduction to Disorderly Conduct (non-DV) and a dismissal under a 1-year Deferred Sentence in exchange for Client obtaining an Anger Management evaluation and successfully completing treatment. Client attended his treatment classes and showed proof through progress reports. As a result, Client’s case was reduced and dismissed accordingly. The judge also granted Mr. Ransom’s Motion to Rescind the No-Contact Order between Client and his ex-girlfriend.

Case Conclusion Date: 2.08.2021

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence (DV) after becoming intoxicated and throwing a chair at her father. Family members contacted police. The family hoped police would simply mediate the situation, give a warning to Client and depart. Instead, the police arrested Client for Assault and took her to jail. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom conducted quick and effective investigations while the case was pending. He assembled a favorable merit package for Client. Mr. Ransom also contacted Client’s father and other family members who witnessed the incident. All of them wanted Client’s charges dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Consequently, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a dismissal under a 1-year Stipulated Order of Continuance Agreement with the Prosecutor. This gives Client an opportunity for the charges to get dismissed in 1 year if she pays a small court fine and avoids future criminal charges. The judge also granted Mr. Ransom’s Motion to Rescind the No-Contact Order between Client and her father.

Case Conclusion Date: 1.25.2021

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence (DV) after slapping his wife during an argument over household chores. Police arrived. Client was arrested and taken to jail. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed that Client’s wife – although upset – ultimately wanted the charges dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Mr. Ransom obtained her written statement and persuaded her to attend Client’s initial court hearing. At the hearing, the Prosecutor and Judge granted Mr. Ransom’s pretrial Motion to Modify the Pretrial Release Conditions and allowed Client to move back home to his family. Also, while the case was pending, Mr. Ransom advised Client to seek anger management counselling. After showing proof of Client’s enrollment and favorable progress reports, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a dismissal under a 1-year Stipulated Order of Continuance Agreement. This gives Client an opportunity to get his charges dismissed in 1 year if he completes his treatment program, pays a small court fine and avoids future criminal charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.05.2020

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence against her boyfriend after Client became intoxicated. The incident was witnessed by the boyfriend’s mother. Police observed scratches and bruising on the boyfriend. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom investigated the matter and created a very strong merit package on Client’s behalf. Also, Client’s boyfriend ultimately wanted the No-Contact Order rescinded and the case dismissed. Consequently, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a downward reduction of the charges to Disorderly Conduct (non-DV) and a dismissal of the conviction under an 18-month Deferred Sentence. And although Client was ordered to get a drug/alcohol evaluation and comply with any recommended treatment, the judge ordered no jail, low fines and that probation go unsupervised after Client completed treatment. The judge also rescinded the No-Contact Order with Client’s boyfriend. All parties were satisfied under the circumstances.

Case Conclusion Date: 7.24.2020

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence (DV) after defending himself from his stepson’s drug-induced rage. The police mistakenly believed Client was the primary aggressor because the stepson suffered minor injuries. At arraignment, the Court ordered Client to have no contact with his stepson. Unfortunately, this resulted in Client having to move out of his own house because his stepson resided there. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the stepson had a long criminal history of assaults and drug abuse. While the case was pending, Stepson also ended up serving a jail sentence at the local jail. Based on this information – and the fact that stepson was legally evicted from the home – the judge granted Mr. Ransom’s pretrial Motion to Modify the Pretrial Release Conditions and allowed Client to move back to his home. Also, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a downward reduction of the Assault charge to Disorderly Conduct (non-DV) and an opportunity for dismissal under a 6-month Stipulated Order of Continuance Agreement. This gave Client an opportunity to get his charges dismissed in 6 months if he paid a small court fine, avoided future criminal charges and had no contact with his stepson for 6 months. Client successfully accomplished all stipulations. His case was dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 7.23.2020

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree Domestic Violence (DV) and Malicious Mischief Third Degree (DV) after allegedly having a physical argument with his girlfriend, pushing her to a wall and breaking items in the house. At first, the Prosecutor wanted Client to plead guilty as charged, serve 5 days jail, pay a $500 fine, obtain a domestic violence evaluation, undergo a minimum 1-year treatment program, enter a no-contact order with girlfriend and be monitored by probation for two years. Making matters more difficult, the City’s prosecutor was concerned about Client’s prior criminal history. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom contacted the Client’s girlfriend and obtained a statement saying she wanted the charges dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Also, Mr. Ransom negotiated a resolution where Prosecutor would dismiss all charges if Client obtained a DV evaluation and attended a small number of treatment sessions. Client followed through on his obligations. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 6.19.2020

Description: Client was accused of Malicious Mischief Third Degree after getting intoxicated and punching an apartment window. At first, the Prosecutor wanted Client to plead guilty as charged, serve 2 days jail, pay a $300 fine and pay restitution to the victim. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom contacted the alleged victim and the property management company managing the apartment. All parties agreed to dismiss the case under a Compromise of Misdemeanor. This legal instrument allows dismissal of property crimes under RCW 10.22

Case Conclusion Date: 3.18.2020

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree DV in the aftermath of a drunken argument with his live-in girlfriend. Client allegedly threw a vase at her head. At first, Prosecutor was unwilling to negotiate a reduction of the charges. Later, Mr. Ransom discovered the alleged victim moved away and wanted the charges dismissed. Mr. Ransom obtained her statement stating her desires to see the case dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Prosecutor was still unconvinced to reduce or dismiss. Therefore, Mr. Ransom filed and successfully argued a Motion to Compel the Prosecutor to produce the alleged victim for an interview. The alleged victim did not cooperate with the prosecution. As a result, Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 3.5.2020

Description: Client was accused of Assault Fourth Degree DV in the aftermath of a heated argument with his wife. Police were called. After Client was charged, his wife wrote a statement asking the Prosecutor to dismiss the charges and rescind the No-Contact Order. Client also attended a DV Impact Panel in order to educate himself on preventing domestic violence. Nevertheless, the Prosecutor was unwilling to negotiate a reduction of the charges. Mr. Ransom confirmed the matter for jury trial and prepared accordingly. Prosecutor dismissed four days before trial.

Case Conclusion Date: 3.4.2020

Description: Client accused of Assault Fourth Degree DV after an argument she had with her husband after a night of drinking and carousing the nightclubs. Client was intoxicated and allegedly struck her husband in the face while he drove them home. Mr. Ransom investigated the matter. Despite the factual allegations, Client’s husband did not want to prosecute the matter. Consequently, Mr. Ransom successfully negotiated a Stipulated Order of Continuance allowing the case to get dismissed after 1 year of good behavior and anger management counseling. Client successfully completed these stipulations. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 2.27.2020

Description: Client was accused of Malicious Mischief Third Degree (DV) after accidentally destroying the rear-view mirror of his girlfriend’s car. Both parties were intoxicated and arguing inside the car. Client was wildly gesticulating with his hands, and unfortunately, broke off the mirror.  Mr. Ransom investigated the matter. There were no available witnesses. Also, Client’s girlfriend wanted the No-Contact rescinded and the charges dismissed. At a pre-trial court hearing, Mr. Ransom successfully argued a Motion to Rescind the No-Contact Order to allow Client and his girlfriend to lawfully be in each other’s presence. From there, Mr. Ransom successfully negotiated a dismissal of the charges. All Client needed needed to do was obtain a favorable alcohol evaluation and follow its minimal recommendations. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 1.27.2020

Description: Client accused of Assault Fourth Degree DV after an argument he had with his girlfriend and her friend. Mr. Ransom investigated the matter. Neither the Client’s girlfriend or her friend responded to Mr. Ransom’s attempts to contact them. Mr. Ransom successfully argued a Motion to Compel pre-trial interviews with them. This motion requires the Prosecutor to provide relevant and important information to the defense when requested. Here, the information requested was access to the Prosecutor’s alleged victim and witness. Dismissal is the proper remedy for the Prosecutor’s inability to produce a victim on these types of charges. Similar to Mr. Ransom, Prosecutor could not locate  the alleged victim. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.18.2019

Description: Client was charged with Malicious Mischief Third Degree under RCW 9A.48.090. The charge is a gross misdemeanor carrying a maximum of 1 year in jail and a $5,000.00 fine. Here, Client became intoxicated and smashed the window of a local business he wandered by. Despite the challenging circumstances, Mr. Ransom resolved the case through hard work and careful negotiations. The Prosecutor was impressed with Mr. Ransom’s efforts to contact the complaining witness and compensate her for the damage to her window. These efforts persuaded Prosecutor to join Mr. Ransom’s Motion to Dismiss under Washington’s Compromise of Misdemeanor statute RCW 10.22.010. Client avoided jail,  probation and a criminal conviction.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.11.2019

Description: Client drove his 10-year-old son home from school. The mood was tense. Unfortunately, Client’s son was excused earlier that day for fighting. As they exited the vehicle, Client physically restrained his son from running away. Consequently, Client grabbed the front of his son’s shirt and walked the boy inside the house. Later, Client’s son told his mother  – who was Client’s estranged ex-wife – what happened. She called police and demanded an investigation. Police obtained the surveillance video from Client’s home security system and informed Client they would seek felony charges of Assault of a Child in the Second Degree (DV). This is a Class B felony carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years prison and $20,000.00 fine. Client retained Mr. Ransom to persuade the Prosecutor from filing charges. Mr. Ransom quickly investigated the matter and contacted both the police officer involved and the Prosecutor. Later, Mr. Ransom met Prosecutor at the Prosecutor’s office. Together, they watched the surveillance video. Although the video could be interpreted any number of ways, Mr. Ransom reminded Prosecutor that a substantive defense to child assault charges is Lawful Physical Discipline of a Child under WPIC 17.07. Consequently, Prosecutor declined to file any criminal charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.18.2019

Description: Client and her co-defendant female friend were both charged with Residential Burglary and Assault Fourth Degree. Here, they caught the co-defendant’s boyfriend with a mistress inside of the mistress’s house. A physical fight ensued inside the home. Client and her co-defendant friend were arrested and charged. Residential Burglary is a Class C Felony exposing defendants to 5 years prison and a $10,000.00 fine. A person is guilty if, with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, the person enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling. Here, Client adamantly denied planning or participating in assaulting the co-defendant’s boyfriend and mistress. Client merely gave co-defendant a ride to the dwelling and accompanied co-defendant inside the house. In a very favorable plea deal, the Prosecutor offered to dismiss the Residential Burglary felony in exchange for a guilty plea to gross misdemeanor Assault Fourth Degree with no jail. Client happily accepted the resolution.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.03.2019

Description: Client accused of Assault Fourth Degree DV and Malicious Mischief Third Degree DV following an argument he had with his girlfriend where her cell phone was destroyed. Making matters more challenging, Client’s girlfriend did not respond to Mr. Ransom’s attempts to contact and/or interview her. Mr. Ransom argued a Motion to Compel an interview with her. This motion requires the Prosecutor to provide relevant and important information to the defense when requested. Here, the information requested was access to the Prosecutor’s alleged victim. Dismissal is the proper remedy for the Prosecutor’s inability to produce a victim on these types of charges. Unfortunately for the prosecution, Client’s girlfriend did not respond to their attempts to contact her either. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.16.2019

Description: Police searched Client’s home. They found a bag of white powdery substance which appeared to be methamphetamine. Police immediately tested the powdery substance with their standard issue NIK Drug Test. Unfortunately, it tested positive for the the presumptive presence of methamphetamine. Although Client adamantly denied the powdery substance was methamphetamine, he was arrested and charged with Unlawful Possession of Methamphetamine under RCW 69.50.4013. This is a Class C Felony punishable up to 5 years prison and a $10,000.00 fine. Making matters worse, a conviction prohibits defendants from receiving government benefits and cripples their career opportunities. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom conducted aggressive investigations. Through chain of custody investigations, he obtained a copy of the WA State Patrol’s actual forensic drug test of the powdery substance. It did not test positive for Methamphetamine. This finding blatantly contradicted the NIK test results. The powdery substance was, in fact, basic table salt. Based on these findings, Mr. Ransom filed a Knapstad Motion to Dismiss the charges for lack of evidence. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.18.2019

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with three counts of Rape in the Second Degree under RCW 9A.44.050(1)(a). Each charge is a Class A felony carrying a 25-year life sentence in prison and a $50,000.00 fine. A conviction also brings mandatory registration as sex offender for the remainder of the offender’s natural life, years of sexual deviance treatment and restitution to the victim for any physical and mental anguish suffered. Here, the alleged victim reported to her school counselor that Client sexually assaulted her numerous times over a number of years. She described the encounters as non-consensual and coerced by threats to harm her family if she did not comply. Police contacted Client.  Although he admitted sexual contact, he described the contact as consensual. Mr. Ransom formally interviewed the alleged victim. He also conducted thorough investigations and filed Motions to Compel the alleged victim’s criminal history and mental health history. Ultimately, the alleged victim decided she wanted the case dismissed. Given the lack of independent evidence, Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.05.2019

Outcome: Reduced to Gross Misdemeanor Assault Fourth Degree (non-DV)

Description: Client was charged with Assault Second Degree With a Deadly Weapon, a Class B “Violent” Felony strike offense under RCW 9A.36.021. The charge carries a maximum sentence of 10 years prison and a $20,000.00 fine. Here, Client’s wife accused him of drawing a firearm and poking her in the side with it. The consequences were egregious. By itself, the Deadly Weapon Enhancement brought an automatic 3 years of prison if Client was convicted. He would also have to register as a felony firearm offender, lose his rights to own/possess firearms, lose voting rights, have a court-imposed No-Contact Order and risked jeopardizing his career and military benefits. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom thoroughly investigated the matter and worked toward a fair resolution. He assembled a merit package consisting of a favorable statement from Client’s wife, numerous character reference letters and favorable evaluation reports from his job. Finally, Client obtained a DV evaluation. Consequently, Mr. Ransom revealed the lack of evidence/witnesses to the Prosecutor and ultimately persuaded Prosecutor to offer a two-step reduction to misdemeanor assault (non-DV). The judge sentenced Client to serve no jail, pay a small fine, undergo DV treatment and that probation would end upon the successful completion of treatment.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.20.2019

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Malicious Mischief Third Degree under RCW 46.52.010. Here, Client became intoxicated and accidentally damaged a citizen’s car door while intoxicated. Mr. Ransom contacted the victim and persuaded him to enter a Compromise of Misdemeanor under RCW 10.22.010. Client wrote an apology letter and paid the damages to victim’s car in exchange for a signed Declaration from the victim stating he did not want Client prosecuted. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.09.2019

Outcome: Dismissed Counts I & II, Prevented the Suspension of Hunting License

Description: Client was originally charged with the following Hunting and Gaming crimes: Count I Unlawful Hunting of Big Game Second Degree, Count II Unlawful Purchase/Use of a Hunting License and Count III Unlawful Transportation of Fish or Wildlife. Counts I & II are gross misdemeanors exposing Client to 1 year in jail and a $5,000 fine each. Making matters worse, Counts I and II brought the automatic suspension of Client’s hunting privileges for 2 years if he was convicted. Here, Client shot a large deer, followed it into the forest and shot another deer. Fish & Wildlife (F&W) authorities arrived while Client was dressing both deer. They seized his rifle and cited him with the charges above. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom assembled a favorable merit package and persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss Count I and II in exchange for a plea to Count III, which was merely a simple misdemeanor. Client served no jail and paid a $500 fine. Even better, our resolution avoided the suspension of Client’s hunting privileges.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.21.2019

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Possession of Methamphetamine, a Class C Felony under RCW 69.50.4013(1). The charge carries a maximum sentence of 5 years prison and a $10,000.00 fine. Here, police officers found Client asleep inside a vehicle she did not own. Officers woke her, questioned her and discovered methamphetamine during the search. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed that Client had significant mental health issues. Indeed, there were serious concern whether Client was competent to assist in her representation. In felony matters, defendants who are found incompetent must be placed in a DSHS facility for 90 days of competency restoration treatment. If that treatment is not successful, it is possible for a defendant to be ordered into further restoration treatment for a period of up to an additional 270 days. If a defendant is not successfully restored, however, then the State must amend or dismiss the charges. Consequently, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss the charges rather than force Client to unnecessarily undergo an 90-day observation from DSHS which probably would have found Client incompetent anyway.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.30.2019

Outcome: Reduced & Dismissed

Description: Client faced two counts of Attempting to Obtain a Controlled Substance By Fraud Or Forgery under RCW 69.50.403, a Class C Felony. Here, Client allegedly tried to obtain prescription medications from Rite-Aid via forged documents. Mr. Ransom created a compelling merit package which revealed Client was a college student who suffered from pre-existing brain injury/trauma. Her injury – and its following misdiagnosis – resulted in Client’s psychosis of taking unnecessary medications prescribed by her doctor. Additionally, Client’s vulnerable condition also made her susceptible to manipulations from people she believed were her friends. While her case was pending, Client successfully completed an intensive drug treatment program. The combination of Client’s fairly strong Diminished Capacity defense and her successful completion of a drug treatment program persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss one count and reduce the other count to Criminal Solicitation, which is not a felony and only a gross misdemeanor. Client served no jail and preserved her ability to obtain federal student financial aid. Also, she can vacate/expunge the Solicitation conviction after 3 years.

Case Conclusion Date: 12.12.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Making False Statements to a Public Servant under RCW 9A.76.175. The charge is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year of jail and a $5,000.00 fine. Even worse, it is a crime of dishonesty which negatively affects future job prospects and opportunities. Here, Client tried to purchase marijuana through a stranger he met online. Unfortunately, the stranger stole Client’s money and did not deliver the marijuana as promised. Client contacted 911 and said the stranger stole Client’s money. Eventually, the police caught the individual who stole Client’s money. Upon further investigation, however, the police discovered the nature of the illegal transaction between Client and the stranger. Consequently, although the stranger was charged with theft, Client was also charged with Making False Statements to a Public Servant. The initial plea offer demanded that Client to plead guilty as charged, serve five days of jail and pay a $500 fine. However, through careful negotiations and a well-written apology letter from Client to the police, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.28.2018

Outcome: Reduced & Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Reckless Driving under RCW 46.61.500. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 fine, mandatory evaluations with treatment (drugs, alcohol and/or aggressive driving treatment depending on the circumstances), active probation and a 30-day license suspension. Client was the victim of a Hit-& Run accident and engaged a high-speed chase with the vehicle that struck him. Surveillance videos recorded the high-speed chase occurring. Fortunately, Client had a valid Necessity defense. In short, Necessity is a defense to a charge of Reckless Driving if (1) the defendant reasonably believed the commission of the crime was necessary to avoid or minimize a harm; (2) the harm sought to be avoided was greater than the harm resulting from a violation of the law; (3) the threatened harm was not brought about by the defendant; and (4) no reasonable legal alternative existed. Here, Client merely wished to gain the contact information of the vehicle that struck his vehicle and report that fleeing driver to police. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom’s negotiations with Prosecutor improved. Prosecutor agreed to reduce the charge to Negligent Driving under RCW 46.61.5429. This is a simple misdemeanor which avoids the 30-day license suspension that Reckless Driving brings. Prosecutor offered no jail, $250 fine, 24 hours of community service and a 1-year deferred sentence resulting in dismissal if Client attends a traffic safety driving class. This was a good resolution which avoided a risky jury trial and ended in dismissal.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.21.2018

Outcome: Reduced Felonies to Misdemeanors, Avoided Prison & Rescinded No-Contact Order

Description: Client was originally charged with Assault Second Degree DV under RCW 9A.46.021 and Malicious Mischief First Degree DV under RCW 9A.48.070. The charges involved a Class B felony strike offense and a Class C felony with maximum prison and/or fines being 10 years and $20,000. Although Client had no prior criminal history, he faced the possibility of going to prison for 1 year or longer. The facts were egregious. The alleged victim was the girlfriend of Client, a well-known successful local entrepreneur. Unfortunately, Client’s girlfriend reported to police that Client brutally attacked her, strangled her and destroyed her property. Client was arrested. After posting bail, the police learned that Client and his girlfriend were mutually meeting each other and violating the No-Contact Order. Again, Client was arrested. He was also charged with Tampering With a Witness under RCW 9A.72.120, Violation of a No-Contact Order DV under RCW 26.50.110 and Failure to Surrender a Weapon (Firearm) under RCW 9.41.800. These charges were Class C felonies and gross misdemeanor DV offenses. This time, the Court ordered Client to wear an Electronic Home Detention ankle bracelet in order to track his locations via GPS and prevent further contact with his girlfriend. In another twist, Client’s girlfriend came forward and recanted her accusations. She admitted lying to police about being attacked. Ultimately, she wanted all charges dismissed, the No-Contact Order rescinded and to be reunited with Client. Mr. Ransom filed pretrial motions to compel evidence, release property, amend release conditions and decrease bail. Later, in yet another twist, Mr. Ransom discovered that law enforcement officers made crucial, detrimental errors in their investigations. At a court hearing, the judge decided these officers should be removed from further investigating Client’s case. The accumulation of the investigative errors, Mr. Ransom’s pretrial motions and Client’s girlfriend refusing to cooperate with authorities encouraged the Prosecution to resolve the charges favorably on Client’s behalf. Ultimately, the felony charges were dismissed. Client pled guilty to gross misdemeanors. Although Client was ordered to serve 30 days jail, obtain a DV evaluation, follow treatment and be monitored by probation for 2 years, the judge also allowed jail alternatives and rescinded the No-Contact Order, thus reuniting Client with his girlfriend. Mr. Ransom also persuaded the court to remove Client’s ankle bracelet, return Client’s cell phone and iPad which were confiscated by police and allow Client to move back home.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.21.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.46.041. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to a year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine, DV evaluations, drug/alcohol evaluations, active probation and No-Contact Orders with any alleged victims. Being convicted also harms future employment opportunities, prohibits the owning/possessing of firearms and denies entry into Canada. Here, the allegations involved Client drinking alcohol and slapping/dragging his wife in front of their children. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom worked hard to reduce or dismiss the charges. He advised Client to obtained an alcohol evaluation. It revealed Client suffered no alcohol problems. Also, Mr. Ransom drafted a statement with Client’s wife expressing her desire to rescind the No-Contact Order and dismiss Client’s charges. Finally, Mr. Ransom contacted Prosecutor and scheduled a Motion to Rescind the No-Contact Order between Client and Client’s wife before the holiday season. Consequently, on the day before Thanksgiving, Prosecutor offered to reduce the Assault DV to Disorderly Conduct non-DV. Disorderly Conduct is a simple misdemeanor, and does not deter any future employment opportunities. The judge imposed no jail and a minimal $250 fine. He rescinded the No-Contact Order and imposed no probation. Finally, Client’s Disorderly Conduct conviction shall be dismissed after 1 year under a Deferred Sentence agreement. Client was extremely happy to be reunited with his family in time to celebrate the holidays together.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.16.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit and Run Unattended under RCW 46.52.010 and Improper Backing of Vehicle under RCW 46.61.605. Here, Client accidentally backed into another vehicle and damaged it. The Hit and Run charge is a gross misdemeanor carrying a maximum of 1 year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine and increased car insurance rates. The Improper Backing charge is a traffic infraction. At first, Prosecutor wanted Client to plead guilty to the Hit and Run charge, pay a $300 fine and perform 16 hours of community service. Nevertheless, Mr. Ransom sought dismissal through a Compromise of Misdemeanor statute under RCW 10.22. The allows dismissal of property charges if the alleged victim is compensated for the damages. Here, Client’s car insurance company paid the damages to the alleged victim’s vehicle. Unfortunately, Mr. Ransom ran into another hurdle: the alleged victim failed to respond to both Mr. Ransom’s and the Prosecutor’s attempts at contact. Nevertheless, the lack of response ultimately worked in Client’s favor. Mr. Ransom successfully argued a Motion to Compel a Witness Interview. Again, the alleged victim never responded. This prompted Prosecutor to dismiss the charges in their entirety. Client avoided jail, avoided probation and avoided a criminal conviction altogether.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.31.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to a year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine, DV evaluations, drug/alcohol evaluations and/or 2-5 years of active probation at the cost of $100.00 per month. Here, the allegations involved Client choking and wrestling the alleged victim. They were relatives who lived together. The alleged victim recorded the entire incident on her iPhone. Overwhelmingly, the video shows the alleged victim instigating the fight and attacking Client. The sole witness would have testified that Client responded in self-defense. Also, during the course of investigations, Mr. Ransom uncovered evidence that the alleged victim has a history of violent, aggressive behavior against Client and others. As a result, Mr. Ransom successfully argued a pretrial motion to admit the evidence under ER 404(b), ER 608 and ER 609 and in support of Client’s self-defense claims. If the jury acquitted Client on self-defense, then Mr. Ransom would have recovered attorney’s fees. Our efforts were fruitful. Ultimately, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to offer a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). This allowed dismissal of the charges in 1 year if Client showed law-abiding behavior and simply avoided criminal charges. Client fulfilled his end of the bargain. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.09.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Malicious Mischief Third Degree under RCW 9A.48.090, Criminal Trespass First Degree under RCW 9A.52.070 and Minor in Possession under RCW 66.44.270. All crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to 1 year in jail and a $5,000.00 fine. Here, Client was a college student who walked into a dormitory uninvited and destroyed property while under the influence of alcohol. He risked his future career prospects and being expelled from school if convicted. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom negotiated a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). This outcome allowed dismissal of all charges in one year if Client paid the property damage and attended Alcohol Drug Information School. This was very good outcome which avoided expulsion and saved Client’s future career.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.05.2018

Outcome: Dismissed Majority of Charges & Entered DOSA Sentence With Credit for Time Served.

Description: Client charged with seven counts of Residential Burglary under RCW 9A.52.025 and three counts of Theft First Degree under RCW 9A.56.030. All crimes are Class B felonies exposing Client to a maximum 10 years prison and a $20,000 fine on each count. Here, Client and other co-defendants allegedly conducted a series of numerous burglaries in Client’s mobile home park. Years passed before formal charges were brought against Client. When charges were filed, Client was actually serving a prison sentence on an unrelated matter. Mr. Ransom entered favorable negotiations with Prosecutor. The resolution dismissed five of the seven Residential Burglary charges and reduced the remaining two Residential Burglaries to Burglary in the Second Degree. The resolution also dismissed all three Theft First Degree Counts. Finally, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor Prosecutor agree to offer a favorable sentencing alternative under Washington’s Drug Offender Sentencing Act (DOSA). The dismissals and downward reductions allowed Client to be given credit for prison time that he already served. Later, after his release, Client would enter drug treatment and be monitored by the Department of Corrections for 29 months. This was a highly favorable sentence under the circumstances. Client served no additional prison time even though his exposure was an additional 63-85 months on top of the prison sentence he was already serving if he was found guilty at trial.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.12.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer under RCW 9A.76.020. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail and $5,000.00 fine. Here, police officers approached Client and Client’s wife at a bus station. The police officers mistakenly thought Client’s wife was a drug dealer with warrants for her arrest. Officers detained Client’s wife and placed her in a wrist lock. Client became agitated. Eventually, the officers realized they made a mistake regarding the identity of Client’s wife. Although they released Client’s wife and did not arrest her, they cited and arrested Client for Obstructing. Mr. Ransom successfully argued a Knapstad Motion to dismiss. The judge granted the motion and dismissed the case.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.06.2018

Outcome: Dismissal of All Charges

Description: Client was an avid hunter who faced numerous Hunting and Gaming charges: Spotlighting Big Game under RCW 77.15.450, Unlawful Hunting of Big Game under RCW 77.15.410 and Shooting a Firearm From a Vehicle under RCW 77.15.460. Each charge is a Fish and Wildlife hunting violation and a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000.00 fine. Here, Client allegedly shot a decoy deer from his vehicle while spotlighting the decoy deer with his headlights. Client’s firearm was confiscated by the Fish & Wildlife authorities. Making matters worse, Client risked his hunting license getting suspended or revoked if he was convicted. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom negotiated a favorable resolution. Client’s case was continued for 2 years under a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) ending in dismissal of all charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.28.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Malicious Mischief Second Degree DV under RCW 9A.48.080. This is a Class C felony punishable up to 5 years prison and a $10,000.00 fine. Here, Client allegedly became intoxicated and damaged his ex-girlfriends car while trying to access it to recover his belongings. Making matters worse, the crime was charged as Domestic Violence (DV) crime because the two were in a dating relationship. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom undertook in-depth investigations. He interviewed the alleged victim twice. Both interviews showed the victim lacked credibility and was vindictive toward Client. Also, it was impossible to assess the damages to the vehicle because police never photographed the vehicle and it was sold afterward. Ultimately, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to offer a 1-year Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) which dismissed the Malicious Mischief charges in their entirety if Client paid a small restitution amount to the alleged victim. Client accepted, and was very happy for the outcome.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.26.2018

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree under RCW 9A.36.041 following an altercation at a grocery store parking lot. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to a year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine and 2-5 years of active probation. Convictions can lead to loss of employment opportunities, travel restrictions and loss of firearm rights. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom thoroughly investigated the case. There were no independent witnesses who would testify that Client assaulted the alleged victim. Also, the alleged victims never responded to Mr. Ransom’s attempts at contact. Prosecutor conducted his own investigations and determined that the victim lacked credibility. Consequently, Prosecutor dismissed the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.22.2018

Outcome: Reduced Class A Violent Sex Felony to Class C Nonviolent, Assault Third Degree

Description: Client originally charged with Rape in the Second Degree by Forcible Compulsion under RCW 9A.44.050. This is a class A felony exposing him to life in prison, $50,000.00 fine, or both. Here, even though Client has no prior felony history, being convicted exposed him to 78-102 months in prison, mandatory registration for life as a sex offender in Washington State, sexual deviancy evaluations, years of treatment, payment of court fines, restitution to the victim and, ultimately, deportation. According to police reports, Client allegedly raped an ex-girlfriend. Later, the victim underwent a sexual assault examination at the hospital. It showed significant injuries to her genitalia. The main issue was whether the sexual acts leading to the victim’s injuries were consensual. After arguing numerous pretrial motions and victim interviews, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a highly favorable plea resolution which met Client’s expectations. Client pled guilty to Assault Third Degree, which is a Class C nonviolent and non-sex offense felony. He did not have to register as a sex offender, undergo sexual deviancy evaluations, or live in a community custody halfway house. And although the judge ordered him to serve 3 months in jail, pay minimum court fines and undergo drug/alcohol treatment, he avoided prison and received a far shorter sentence than his potential exposure to a sex offense conviction. Furthermore, his Assault conviction shall not trigger deportation.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.23.2017

Outcome: Reduced to Civil Infraction

Description: Client was charged with Negligent Driving First Degree under RCW 46.61.5249. This is a simple misdemeanor punishable up to 90 days jail and a $1,000.00 fine. He allegedly exceeded the speed limit, failed to negotiate a turn, and struck a speed warning sign; a mailbox and a large tree. After the accident, Client admitted to law enforcement that he smoked marijuana hours before driving. Making matters worse, Client had a prior Negligent Driving conviction. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom worked hard for good results. There was a lack of evidence to the charges because the police officer did not seek a blood test. This opened the door for Mr. Ransom to file and argue other motions, including a CrR 3.6 Motion to Dismiss for lack of probable cause and a CrR 3.5 Motion to suppress Client’s statements to police. Ultimately, instead of arguing the motions, Mr. Ransom successfully persuaded Prosecutor to reduce the charge to Negligent Driving Second Degree. This is a civil traffic infraction and not a drug or alcohol-related riving conviction. The court imposed a $550 fine with no criminal convictions, no jail, no probation and no driver’s license restrictions.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.18.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041. Client and his ex-girlfriend were heard arguing on a 911 call. Apparently, she placed the call during the midst of their argument. Police quickly appeared at the scene. By then, Client had fled the scene. Client’s ex-girlfriend said Client assaulted her while they argued. Generally, a 911 call is admissible evidence at trial. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom’s investigations showed Client’s ex-girlfriend suffered from numerous personal complications which called her credibility into question. Also, she wanted the case dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Ultimately, Prosecutor dismissed. Client was extremely satisfied.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.10.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree under RCW 9A.36.041 following a “push-and-shove” incident with his neighbor. The crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 fine, evaluations, No-Contact Order and probation. Mr. Ransom’s investigations showed the alleged victim suffered from Dementia. Client responded in self-defense to the alleged victim’s attack. Prosecutor was persuaded to dismiss the case after he interviewed the alleged victim and discovered the depths of his illness. Client was extremely happy with the dismissal outcome.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.11.2017

Outcome: Reduced & Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree With Sexual Motivation under RCW 9A.36.041. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to a year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine, a psycho-sexual evaluation, sexual deviance treatment, mandatory No-Contact orders and two years of active probation at the cost of $100.00 per month. Here, the alleged victim was a customer of the Client’s mini-market store that Client managed. The alleged victim claimed that Client sexually touched her unlawfully and without permission while she shopped for items in his store. The alleged victim called her father, who called police. Due to the nature of the crime, Client absolutely needed a downward reduction, dismissal or jury trial acquittal of the charges if he wanted to maintain employment. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom worked hard to resolve the case with better results. The mini-mart’s video surveillance footage showed that Client never touched the alleged victim in a sexual manner. Also, the alleged victim had credibility issues. Ultimately, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to reduce the charges to Disorderly Conduct, no jail, small fine, no evaluations and no probation. Even better, the Disorderly Conduct conviction would be dismissed in 1 year under a Deferred Sentence. The judge accepted the recommendations. Client was extremely satisfied with the result.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.14.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV following an argument with his live-in girlfriend. She called police stating that Client disabled her phone and wasn’t allowing her to take care of her medical needs. Police arrived and arrested Client. Mr. Ransom’s investigations showed that Client’s girlfriend had a significant criminal history as well as a history of mental health issues to include Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia. Later, Mr. Ransom contacted Client’s girlfriend. She immediately wanted the case dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. She gave Mr. Ransom full access to her medical files which revealed her mental health conditions and permitted Mr. Ransom to share the information with Prosecutor. Under the circumstances, it appeared the situation was significantly blown out of proportion. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.02.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year and jail and a $5,000 fine. The domestic violence designation also carries harsher penalties and consequences, included mandatory No-Contact Orders, loss of gun rights, loss of career opportunities and bars entry into Canada. Here, Client was caring for her children when her intoxicated boyfriend (the alleged victim) arrived home. They argued about his drinking while she held their child in her arms. Boyfriend pushed Client, who slapped boyfriend in self-defense  and in defense of her child. Boyfriend called police, who arrived and unfortunately arrested Client. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed boyfriend had a substantial criminal history which included prior domestic violence convictions against different women. Mr. Ransom contacted the boyfriend, who wanted the case dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Mr. Ransom also prepared for trial. He claimed that Client responded in self-defense and in defense of her child. Mr. Ransom also filed numerous pretrial motions which included requests to admit the boyfriend’s prior criminal history and abusive nature under ER 404(b), ER 608 and ER 609. In light of Mr. Ransom’s trial preparations, the “victim” recanting and the substantive defenses, Mr. Ransom negotiated a full dismissal of the charges and avoided trial altogether. Client was extremely grateful.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.18.2017

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041 and Malicious Mischief Third Degree DV under RCW 9A.48.090. Both crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to a year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine, and active probation. Here, police reports indicate that Client assaulted her ex-boyfriend and damaged his vehicle. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed that ex-boyfriend wanted the charges dismissed and the No-Contact Order rescinded. Also, Client followed Mr. Ransom’s advice to pay the property damages, obtain an anger management evaluation and follow its treatment recommendations. The outcome was favorable. Prosecutor was impressed with Client’s efforts and willingness to take accountability. Consequently, Prosecutor dismissed the Assault charge and recommended the court enter a 2-year Deferred Sentence on the Malicious Mischief conviction. This disposition allows dismissal of the conviction if Client maintains law-abiding behavior and pays the damages to her ex-boyfriend’s vehicle.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.19.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was a medical student and an Iranian immigrant charged with Unlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance under RCW 69.50.4013 following a search of his luggage at the U.S./Canada border. Border patrol agents found Methadone and Lorazepam. Although Client explained the prescriptions were for himself and his mother, he failed to have proof of the prescriptions with him at the time. The charge is a class C felony drug offense. Making matters more difficult, Client risked losing his medical residency and would have been deported back to Iran if he was convicted of the charges. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom thoroughly investigated the matter and created a strong merit package consisting of valid prescriptions, character reference letters and a statement from Client’s mother explaining that she accidentally packed her prescription into his luggage. Mr. Ransom also referred Client to competent immigration attorney who advised that the 5th Circuit federal court – which holds jurisdiction where Client resides – regularly deports immigrants who are convicted of felony and misdemeanor drug charges. Finally, Mr. Ransom filed a Notice of Defenses suggesting that he would move forward with the defense of Unwitting Possession under WPIC 52.01. Fortunately, the combination of these efforts persuaded Prosecutor to offer dismissal under a 3-year Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). Client avoided criminal convictions, deportation and the revocation of his student VISA.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.18.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Felony Harassment under RCW 9A.46.020. This is a Class C felony punishable up to 5 years prison and a $10,000 fine. Here, Client allegedly threatened to kill his former employer during a work-related argument. Client suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder and worked in a high-stress environment which was not enjoyable. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom assembled a very strong merit package consisting of Client’s mental health diagnosis, proof of ongoing counseling and numerous character reference letters. With this information, Mr. Ransom convinced Prosecutor this was an isolated incident which showed very uncharacteristic behavior from the Client. Moreover, there was substantial evidence that Client’s threats were not reasonably believable under the circumstances. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.12.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client and his wife were charged with Theft Third Degree under RCW 9A.56.050. The evidence included surveillance video showing Client and his wife stealing items from a department store and escaping in a SUV. The vehicle’s license place was shown on the surveillance video. Through that, the police traced the vehicle’s ownership to Defendant and his wife. They were were mailed criminal citations and a court summons. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000 fine. Making matters worse, it is a crime of dishonesty which (1) deters future employment, (2) jeopardizes obtaining government benefits, and (3) decreases a witness’s credibility while testifying. Mr. Ransom’s investigations showed that Client and his wife sold their SUV weeks before the incident happened. Moreover, their physical descriptions did not match the traits of those caught on video stealing the merchandise. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.10.2017

Outcome: Reduced & Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to a year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine, numerous evaluations, mandatory No-Contact orders, loss of firearms rights, mandatory treatment and two years of active probation. The charges involved Client striking his wife in the arm with a shoe during an argument. Making matters worse, Client was an immigrant non-citizen of the United States. Therefore, he absolutely needed a downward reduction, dismissal or trial acquittal if he wanted to avoid deportation. Fortunately, with the cooperation of Client’s wife, Mr. Ransom convinced the Prosecutor to reduce and dismiss the charges. Client entered a plea to Disorderly Conduct (non-DV) under RCW 9A.84.030. This crime is a simple misdemeanor which does not trigger immigration consequences. The Judge imposed 1 day of jail with full credit for time served and issued a $400 fine. He also ordered Client to obtain an anger management evaluation and follow its recommended treatment, attend a DV Victim Impact Panel and be monitored by probation for 24 months. If Client follows these conditions and avoids any more criminal charges, then his Disorderly Conduct conviction shall be dismissed in two years under a Deferred Sentence.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.06.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041 and Malicious Mischief Third Degree DV under RCW 9A.48.090 following an argument where Client threw ice in her ex-boyfriend’s face and destroyed his painting. Both crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to one year jail and $5,000.00 fine each. At first, Prosecutor recommended Client plead guilty as charged to both counts, obtain a domestic violence evaluation with an alcohol component, pay damages for destroyed property, enter a no-contact order with the victim, serve two years of active probation, and be restricted from owning or possessing firearms. Making matters worse, the DV designation increased the seriousness of the charges and consequences if Client was convicted. Finally, being convicted of any of these charges was extremely detrimental to Client’s teaching career. Despite these challenges, Mr. Ransom worked toward a dismissal. Ultimately, Mr. Ransom convinced the Prosecutor that the alleged victim’s credibility and mental stability was highly questionable. Client followed Mr. Ransom’s advice and started counselling for her anger management issues. This convinced Prosecutor to dismiss the Assault charge, reduce the Malicious Mischief charge to Disorderly Conduct and enter a Deferred Sentence allowing dismissal of all charges after 1 year. The Court rescinded the No-Contact order. Client served no jail, paid minimal fines and saved her career.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.23.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Welfare Fraud under RCW 74.08.331 and RCW 9A.56.030. The crime is a Class C felony punishable up to $10,000.00 and a 5-year prison sentence. Client allegedly bilked Washington State’s welfare benefits system of over $5,000.00. Making matters worse, Welfare Fraud is a crime of “dishonesty and false statement.” By that, the crime means crimes such as perjury, subornation of perjury, false statement, criminal fraud, embezzlement, or false pretense, or any other offense in the nature of criminal offenses, the commission of which involves some element of deceit, untruthfulness, or falsification bearing on the accused’s propensity to be truthful. Additionally, Client risked losing other governmental resources and benefits if she was convicted. Mr. Ransom interviewed the DSHS employees responsible for bringing the charges. His investigations revealed the DSHS’s allegations were incomplete and incompetent. In short, DSHS failed to take numerous income calculations into effect before moving forward with the prosecution. Through careful negotiations, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to enter a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). This agreement allowed dismissal of the charges if Client avoided any more criminal charges for 18 months and repaid $1,000.00 to DSHS.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.14.2017

Outcome: Reduced & Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with numerous Hunting and Gaming charges: Spotlighting Big Game Second Degree under RCW 77.15.450 and two counts of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game Second Degree under RCW 77.15.450. All crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 court fines, loss of firearm rights, revocation of hunting license and the seizure/forfeiture of firearms. Making matters worse, Client risked termination of his employment with the Boeing Co. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom assembled a very strong merit package and convinced the Prosecutor to dismiss one count of Unlawful Hunting of Big Game Second Degree, reduce the Spotlighting charge to Criminal Trespass Second Degree under RCW 9A.52.080 and reduce the remaining Unlawful Hunting of Big Game Second Degree charge to a Wildlife Hunting Infraction under RCW 77.15.160(2)(d). The reductions were to infractions and simple misdemeanors as opposed to gross misdemeanor hunting violations. The court sentenced Client to 3 days of jail alternatives and a $2,000 fine. Ultimately, this resolution effectively avoided all the negative consequences mentioned above. Best of all, Client avoided loss of Boeing security clearance and loss of his job. Finally, Mr. Ransom contacted Fish & Wildlife authorities and convinced them to return Client’s firearm after he paid its fair-market value.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.13.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Unlawful Use of Drug Paraphernalia under RCW 69.50.412. She was known to associate with people who abused heroin. Police found hypodermic needles in her purse that she left in the woods after hanging out with her drug-abusing friends. Client was charged thereafter. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000 fine. Despite the allegations, Mr. Ransom filed a Knapstad Motion to Dismiss because possession of drug paraphernalia by itself is not a crime; the crime requires an improper use. Also, the statute provides that it is lawful for persons over age 18 to possess sterile hypodermic syringes and needles for the purpose of reducing blood borne diseases. Here, Client was merely delivering clean syringes to people who abused heroin. Her intentions were altruistic, and done with the intention of preventing the spread of disease among intravenous drug users. Prosecutor dismissed the case. Client was extremely happy.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.21.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Disorderly Conduct under RCW 10.24.010. This is a simple misdemeanor punishable up to 90 days in jail and a $1,000.00 fine. Client was a college student who allegedly held up up vehicular traffic with his friends. At first, the City prosecutor wanted him to plead guilty to the charges, serve 2 days in jail and pay a $300 fine. Despite the challenges, we went forward resolving his matter with better outcomes. Mr. Ransom assembled a strong merit package, and negotiated an outcome where client received no jail, $693 fine, 8 hours of community service and a dismissal under a 1-year deferred sentence.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.09.2017

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Malicious Mischief Third Degree DV under RCW 9A.48.090. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail and a $5,000 fine. Making matters worse, the charge was designated as “domestic violence,” which lends itself to increased penalties, evaluations, treatment and loss of gun rights if Client was convicted. Here, she was allegedly under the influence when she destroyed her boyfriend’s door after he locked her out and called police during an argument. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom persuaded the boyfriend and Prosecutor to enter a Compromise of Misdemeanor. This allows dismissal of the charges if the victim is paid back the value of their property loss. Mr. Ransom also persuaded Prosecutor to enter this resolution. The case was dismissed and the No-Contact Order was rescinded.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.29.2016

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was a commercial truck driver charged with Assault Fourth Degree under RCW 9A.36.041 during a road rage incident. The crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail and a $5,000 fine. Client was a hardworking family man with no prior criminal history. Unfortunately, he risked losing his employment if convicted of any crimes. Mr. Ransom advised client to seek anger management classes and counseling sessions. Afterward, Mr. Ransom successfully negotiated a dismissal under a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) resolution.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.09.2016

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was a college student charged with Malicious Mischief in the Second Degree DV pursuant to RCW 9A.48.080(1)(a). This crime is a Class C felony exposing him to 5 years of prison and a $10,000 fine. Making matters worse, Client also risked losing his financial aid and academic/career pursuits if he was convicted of this felony. On the night of the incident, Client allegedly became very intoxicated and destroyed his college roommates’ property. After being charged, the Court entered No-Contact Orders between Client and his roommates. Client was expelled from college and moved back home to his parent’s house. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom worked extremely hard to gain favorable outcomes. He advised Client to enroll in a drug treatment program and work a full-time job. After Client completed treatment, Mr. Ransom petitioned the court to rescind the No-Contact Orders so that Client could be re-admitted to college and complete his education. Next, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to admit Client into Drug Court through Whatcom County Superior Court. This gave Client an opportunity to dismiss the felony charges if Client paid for the damages to his roommate’s property and successfully completed Drug Court’s 18-month program without any flaws or relapses. Client did so. His charges were dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.25.2016

Outcome: Reduced & Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Driving While Under the Influence of Intoxicants (DUI) under RCW 46.61.502. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail, a $5,000 fine and mandatory minimum consequences including an alcohol/drug evaluation, treatment, 2-5 years of monitored probation, the suspension of driving privileges through the Department of Licensing (DOL) and the installation of a Ignition Interlock Device (IID) for 1 year. Here, Client had a minor fender-bender in the parking lot of a restaurant after consuming alcoholic beverages. Police arrived. Client was investigated and charged with DUI. At the police station, however, the arresting officer failed to remove Client’s dentures and lip piercing before Client took the DUI breath test (BAC test). The officer’s mistake was a huge departure from standard DUI investigation protocol because foreign objects in one’s mouth can skew the results of a BAC test. Consequently, Mr. Ransom drafted and filed a CrR 3.6 motion to suppress the breath test due to the officer’s flawed investigation. Mr. Ransom’s pretrial motion opened the door for favorable negotiations. Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to amend the DUI to Negligent Driving First Degree, which is a 2-step reduction to a simple misdemeanor. Fortunately, this reduction also avoided both the suspension of Client’s driving privileges and the installation of an IID. Mr. Ransom also negotiated no jail, a small fine, no probation and 8 hours of community service. Even better, Mr. Ransom negotiated a 1-year Deferred Sentence. This outcome allows for complete dismissal of the case after Client completes the aforementioned tasks within 1 year’s time.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.14.2016

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.0431 following an argument and physical confrontation with his wife. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year of jail and $5,000.00 fine. If convicted, Client would lose his right to own or possess firearms; his travel to other countries would be restricted, the Court would order him to undergo a DV evaluation with a minimum 1-year treatment program and he would be monitored by probation. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom successfully persuaded Prosecutor and Judge to rescind the pretrial No-Contact Order while the case was pending. Also, Mr. Ransom negotiated a resolution where Prosecutor would dismiss the charges if Client attended a DV Victim Impact Panel and showed proof of 4 months of marital counseling. Client and his wife accomplished these stipulations. His case was dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.29.2016

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree under RCW 9A.36.041. The crime is a gross misdemeanor exposing her to 1 year jail, $5,000.00 fine, evaluations, mandatory treatment, a No-Contact Order and probation. The allegations involved client striking an individual in the face and pushing the individual out of her home. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the intruder was addicted to drugs and acted in a threatening manner toward Client. Consequently, Client had responded in Self-Defense. Mr. Ransom assembled a favorable merit package consisting of character reference letters, proof of gainful employment, favorable transcripts of completed college classes and her acceptance into Phi Theta Kappa. Also, Mr. Ransom’s investigations discovered the “victim” had an extensive criminal history with impeachable offenses. The combination of Mr. Ransom’s tactics and efforts persuaded the Prosecutor to dismiss the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.07.2016

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client originally charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041; Malicious Mischief Third Degree (DV) under RCW 9A.48.090 and Malicious Mischief Third Degree (non-DV). These crimes are gross misdemeanors. Each one of them is punishable up to a year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine, DV evaluations, drug/alcohol evaluations and 2-5 years of active probation. Being convicted also harmed Client’s future employment opportunities, prohibited the owning/possessing a firearms and denied his entry into Canada. Making matters worse, Client had significant criminal history and was also in the process of trying to become a Canadian citizen. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed that all parties were heavily intoxicated and Client acted in self-defense. Mr. Ransom also discovered the alleged victims did not want to pursue charges. Based on this, Mr. Ransom convinced Prosecutor to enter a 6-month Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). Successful completion of the SOC’s stipulations would result in dismissal of all charges, avoid convictions and allow Client to become a citizen of Canada. While the SOC was pending, Mr. Ransom was informed by Client’s immigration attorney that Client’s criminal charges must be dismissed 3 weeks prior to the SOC’s original dismissal date due to immigration concerns. Despite this unforeseen challenge, Mr. Ransom acted quickly, noted up an early termination hearing and successfully persuaded the Prosecutor and Judge to dismiss the charges three weeks early due to the immigration concerns. Client was extremely happy with this outcome.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.10.2016

Outcome: Dismissed and Resolved in Juvenile Court

Description: Juvenile client was originally charged as an adult accomplice to Kidnapping in the First Degree under RCW 9A.40.020(1), a Class A felony, Robbery in the First Degree under RCW 9A.56.200(1), a Class A felony, and Assault Second Degree under RCW 9A.36.021, a Class B felony. Client’s exposure was 10-25 years prison and/or $20K-$50K each in fines. Also, all of these felonies are strike offenses. Making matters worse, being convicted of the Kidnapping charge brought automatic registration as a sex offender for 5-15 years because the victim involved a minor. The facts were such that the alleged victim was lured to the home of his former girlfriend because he stole a firearm from her step-father. The co-defendant stepfather imprisoned and tortured the juvenile; who was forced to strip naked and enter a freezer with rotten meat. Client allegedly assisted these actions, robbed the juvenile of his clothes and placed a handcuff on the juvenile’s wrist afterward. Fortunately, Mr Ransom negotiated a very favorable resolution under the circumstances. He convinced the Prosecutor that Client was simply at the wrong place at the wrong time. Along with “lack of evidence” theories, Mr. Ransom also worked up substantive defenses of Duress and Necessity if the case proceeded to trial. Ultimately, the Prosecutor agreed to dismiss the adult charges in Superior Court in exchange for pleading guilty to far lesser charges in Juvenile Court. The juvenile court imposed 30 days detention (local sanctions), all of which client received credit for time served.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.06.2016

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client was arrested for Felony Unlawful Imprisonment DV on accusations that he locked his ex-girlfriend in the basement of her father’s home after they argued. Unlawful Imprisonment is a Class C felony exposing Client to 5 years prison and a $10,000.00 fine. Later, Client was pulled over by police officers and arrested on the charge. Officers allegedly recovered contraband during the search incident to arrest and charged Client with Possession of Heroin under RCW 69.50.4013(1). This drug charge is also a Class C felony. Mr. Ransom drafted and filed a pretrial Knapstad Motion to dismiss the Unlawful Imprisonment charge on the argument that the victim was never “imprisoned” because her father, who was home during the incident, freed her minutes after Client departed the house. Regarding the drug charge, Mr. Ransom filed a pretrial CrR 3.6 Motion to Dismiss the drug charge based on lack of probable cause and unlawful search and seizure. Also, Mr. Ransom drafted a Motion to Sever the two counts pursuant to CrR 4.4(b), and State v. Gatalski, 40 Wn. App. 601 (1985). Prosecutor dismissed the charges because of the pretrial motions and the victim’s lack of cooperation.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.14.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Theft Third Degree under RCW 9A.76.050. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000.00 fine. It’s also a crime of dishonesty. While shopping for groceries, client absent-mindedly walked out of the store with a full grocery cart. She intended to retrieve her credit card and not steal items from the store. She was apprehended by store security. Mr. Ransom assembled a strong merit package which humanized Client and proved the incident was accidental. Consequently, Mr. Ransom entered favorable negotiations with the Prosecutor resulting in no jail, low fines and dismissal of the case in 1 year under a Deferred Sentence.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.07.2015

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client faced Hunting and Gaming charges. She was hunting elk with friends in Whatcom County. It was 5:00 p.m. As client and her friends were leaving, they saw an elk. Thinking it was real, client allegedly fired her rifle at the elk. Unbeknownst to Client, however, the elk was a fake/decoy set up by Fish and Wildlife Officers. They contacted client, seized her rifle, and charged her with Spotlighting Big Game Second Degree under RCW 77.15.450(1), Unlawful Hunting of Big Game Second Degree under RCW 77.15.410(b) and Criminal Trespass Second Degree under RCW 9A.52.080. These charges are simple and gross misdemeanors punishable from 90 days to 1 year in jail and $1,000 – $5,000 fine each. Making matters worse, client risked losing her government job, forfeiting her rifle and having her hunting license suspended/revoked. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom successfully negotiated dismissal of the charges under a 6-month Deferred Sentence. Client served no jail and avoided evaluations, probation and restitution. Mr. Ransom also negotiated with the Department of Fish & Wildlife for the return of Clients’ rifle in exchange for a $250 fine.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.25.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Theft in the Third Degree under RCW 9A.56.050. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 364 days jail and a $5,000.00 fine. Client was investigated by her former government employer for defrauding the government of travel reimbursement checks. This charge was particularly debilitating because Client risked losing federal disability benefits if she was convicted of this crime of dishonesty. At first, Prosecutor did not want to negotiate. However, Mr. Ransom assembled a compelling merit package and proceeded with a strong Diminished Capacity Defense. This defense requires proof from an expert that the Defendant experienced an impaired mental condition, caused by disease, trauma, or intoxication but short of insanity, that can reduce the criminal culpability, intent and/or responsibility of the defendant. Mr. Ransom’s pretrial motions compelling discovery (evidence) revealed that client was over-prescribed pain medications after suffering debilitating work-related injuries. Also, the government lacked documentary evidence showing that client intentionally defrauded the government. Finally, Mr. Ransom persuaded Client’s doctor to testify as the expert necessary to prove the Diminished Capacity defense. All these facts and circumstances persuaded Prosecutor to enter a 6-month Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). This was an excellent resolution which avoided a criminal conviction to a crime of dishonesty and prevented Client’s federal disability benefits from being cut.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.25.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Shoplifting. This is a misdemeanor crime of dishonesty exposing him up to 90 days jail and a $1,000.00 fine. Making matters worse, there was reliable video surveillance of the act. At first, the Prosecutor wanted Client to plead guilty as charged. Through careful negotiations, however, Mr. Ransom persuaded the Prosecutor to enter a 1-year Deferred Sentence with no jail. This means Client’s case will be dismissed after one year as long as he pays court fines and completes 8 hours of community service. This was a very good resolution for Client, who was a family man with no prior criminal convictions. He avoids a crime of dishonesty and maintains his clean record after the case is dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.20.2015

Outcome: Dismissed 3 of 4 Counts, Reduced Robbery First Degree & Reverted Adult Case To Juvenile Court

Description: Client and co-defendants robbed a drug dealer. All of them were charged with Robbery First Degree, Criminal Attempt, Criminal Conspiracy & Theft in the Second Degree. These crimes are Class A,B & C felonies. Even though Client was a minor lacking criminal history, he was nevertheless tried as an adult. As such, his prison exposure under the WA Sentencing Guidelines was 10 years in prison if found guilty of all charges; and considerably more if found guilty of Deadly Weapon Enhancements. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom investigated the credibility of the witnesses, worked up a Diminished Capacity defense and constructed a favorable merit package. The results were favorable. Ultimately, Prosecutor was persuaded into dismissing 3 of the 4 counts, reverting the case back into juvenile court and agreeing that Client would only serve 15-36 weeks in juvenile detention. The dismissals and amendments also decreased Client’s juvenile detention exposure from 180 months to 15-36 months. Overall, the outcome was extremely favorable under the circumstances.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.30.2015

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client charged with Nuisance and Littering. Client allegedly received complaints from neighbors that his lawn was littered with debris and unlawfully displayed numerous cars in various states of disrepair. Fortunately, client landscaped his property, took the debris to the dump, covered his antique cars and erected an attractive 6-foot fence. Mr. Ransom assembled a merit package showing recent photos of Client’s repairs and landscaping efforts. Prosecutor amended the criminal charges to a civil infractions. Judge imposed a $375 fine. Client happily paid the fine and received no criminal convictions.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.30.2015

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client charged with Malicious Mischief Third Degree under RCW 9A.48.090 and Theft in the Third Degree under RCW 9A.56.050. Both crimes are gross misdemeanors punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000 fine each. Here, client allegedly became intoxicated at a local lounge, destroyed property and attempted to steal various items. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom assembled a very impressive merit package which greatly humanized Client. Prosecutor was convinced that Client took accountability. Prosecutor dismissed the Theft charges. Although client pled guilty to the Malicious Mischief charge and was ordered to complete 1 day of jail, the Judge granted Mr. Ransom’s requests for a Deferred Sentence allowing dismissal after 1 year of good behavior.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.29.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Felony Harassment (Threats to Kill) under RCW 9A.46.020 after responding to a tense situation where he thought his wife was in danger. Client displayed a firearm. Victim called the police. Client was arrested and charged with Felony Harassment, which is a Class C felony punishable up to 5 years prison and a $10,000 fine. Mr. Ransom Interviewed the alleged victim and convinced Prosecutor that the incident was a huge misunderstanding; albeit a potentially tragic one. Prosecutor was also convinced that Client may have displayed the firearm lawfully under the circumstances. Consequently, Mr. Ransom and Prosecutor entered favorable negotiations. Prosecutor dismissed the Felony Harassment charge from Superior Court and re-filed the matter in District Court. Although client pled guilty to Unlawful Display of a Firearm under RCW 9.41.270, client shall serve no jail and pay minimum fines. Better yet, the case in its entirety shall eventually be dismissed under a 1-year Deferred Sentence. Later, Mr. Ransom filed a Motion for Return of Property and successfully obtained the client’s knife, gun holster and ammunition from the Sheriff’s Office.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.08.2015

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client was charged with Hit & Run Attended under RCW 46.52.020, Failure to Obey an Officer under RCW 46.61.022 and Failure to Comply With a Flagger/Officer/Firefighter under RCW 46.61.015.1. Each charge is a misdemeanor punishable from 90 days up to 1 year in jail, $1,000 – $5,000.00 fines, mandatory evaluations with treatment and 2-5 years active probation. Here, Client allegedly bumped a traffic flagger and disregarded the instructions of police officers to pull over after attending a 4th of July celebration at the Bellingham Marina. Prosecutor threatened to charge Vehicular Assault under RCW 46.61.522, which is a Class B Felony. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom interviewed all witnesses and discovered the driving situation was chaotic, confusing and distracting. Mr. Ransom also assembled a very strong merit package on client’s behalf. Consequently, the Prosecutor agreed to dismiss the H&R and Failure to Obey Officer charges. Client was allowed to serve 10 days jail on Electronic Home Monitoring (ankle bracelet). Although Client pled guilty to the Failure to Comply charge, the Prosecutor agreed to enter a 1-year Deferred Sentence. This resolution dismissed the remaining Failure to Comply charge after 1 year of good behavior.

Case Conclusion Date: 06.08.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Hit and Run Unattended under RCW 46.62.020. He was a commercial truck driver who drove a fully loaded semi truck through the City of Bellingham. Unfortunately, he severely damaged a tree, a sign and a bench owned by the City while making a tight turn. The damage was over $7,000.00. He was cited by police for Hit & Run. Even more unfortunate was the fact that Client stood to lose his job if convicted. Luckily, Mr. Ransom contacted client’s insurance company and the proper City officials involved in assessing the property damages. Mr. Ransom negotiated a very favorable outcome and convinced all parties to dismiss the case pursuant to a Compromise of Misdemeanor under RCW 10.22 after client’s insurance paid the damages. This outcome effectively allowed client to avoid a criminal conviction and maintain his employment.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.21.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Criminal Trespass Second Degree under RCW 9A.52.080. Client allegedly became drunk and disorderly at his company’s hotel party. Police arrived. He was alleged to have disobeyed their instructions to leave the premises. After being forcibly removed from the premises, client found himself facing the above criminal charges. Making matters worse, the Prosecutor threatened to charge Resisting Arrest and Failure to Cooperate charges under RCW 9A.76.040 and RCW 46.61.020. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom assembled a persuasive merit package on Client’s behalf. Consequently, Mr. Ransom negotiated a resolution which reduced the charge to Disorderly Conduct and entered a Deferred Sentence allowing dismissal after one year of good behavior. The resolution also avoided jail, evaluations and probation.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.09.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit & Run Unattended under RCW 46.52.010. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000 fine. Client allegedly struck a telephone pole while driving and fled the scene on foot. The police failed to locate him on the night of the incident. There were also no witnesses to the incident. Eventually, the police contacted the defendant via cell phone and obtained a statement that he did, in fact, crash his vehicle into the telephone pole. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom persuaded Client’s insurance company to pay the damages to the City’s telephone pole. Mr. Ransom also drafted a motion to dismiss the charges under the theory of corpus delicti. This defense allows dismissal of criminal charges if the Prosecutor fails to bring independent evidence of the charges outside of the defendant’s confession. Prosecutor dismissed the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.02.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Theft Second Degree under RCW 9A.56.040. This crime is a Class C Felony exposing Client to 5 years prison and a $10,000 fine. Allegedly, Client exerted unauthorized control of family credit cards. In a strange twist, Client’s family hired Mr. Ransom to try and get the charges dismissed because the circumstances were an isolated  “family matter” which did not necessarily involve the State of Washington. Mr. Ransom contacted Prosecutor. Since the family was the only witness and no independent evidence of the charges existed, Prosecutor dismissed the case.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.04.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Possession of Methamphetamine under RCW 69.50.401. He was pulled over for speeding and executing a U-turn. Police conducted a highly questionable search of his person and recovered Methamphetamine. The charge is a Class C Felony punishable up to 5 years prison and a $10,000 fine. Mr. Ransom drafted numerous pretrial motions to suppress the evidence and/or dismiss the charges. Rather than argue the motions, the Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.03.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was a college student charged with Hit & Run Unattended pursuant to RCW 46.52.010. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail and a $5,000 fine. Here, surveillance evidence revealed my client accidentally struck a parked vehicle in her apartment complex. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom facilitated dismissal of the charges via a Compromise of Misdemeanor under RCW 10.22. Also, Mr. Ransom persuaded the defendant’s insurance company to “total out” the victim’s vehicle and provide a large cash payment to the victim for the loss of her vehicle. All parties were very satisfied with the outcome.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.27.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Unlawful Imprisonment DV under RCW 9A.40.040(1). This is a Class C felony punishable up to 5 years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Here, Client was alleged to have forcibly prevented his girlfriend from leaving his car while he was driving. A motorist called 911. Although Client’s girlfriend informed police that she was arguing with my client, she did not want to press charges. Nevertheless, Prosecutor charged the case as a felony. Ultimately, Mr. Ransom sought dismissal of the charges under a Necessity defense. Necessity is a defense to criminal charges if (1) the defendant reasonably believed the commission of the crime was necessary to avoid or minimize a harm; and (2) the harm sought to be avoided was greater than the harm resulting from a violation of the law; and (3) the threatened harm was not brought about by the defendant; and (4) no reasonable legal alternative existed. Here, client, sought to prevent his girlfriend from injuring herself while trying to escape a moving vehicle. Under this defense, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated dismissal of the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.27.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit and Run Unattended pursuant to RCW 46.52.010. He was a Montana truck driver from who drove his semi truck through the parking lot of a business and accidentally caused extensive property damage. Unfortunately, his employer suspended him from driving and threatened termination of his job unless the criminal matter resolved itself favorably. Nevertheless, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated with the local business owner and their insurance provider. All parties agreed to enter a Compromise of Misdemeanor pursuant to RCW 10.22.  Mr Ransom coordinated these efforts via tight communications, motions practice and the signing of declarations. Mr. Ransom also waived the defendant’s numerous court appearances while case was pending. Client was extremely happy with the dismissal. It saved his career.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.25.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV after an argument she had with her significant other. The argument was regarding her cell phone usage. Client tried preventing her boyfriend from destroying her property. Mr. Ransom conducted extensive investigations. After interviewing the witnesses and obtaining a favorable statement from the alleged victim, Prosecutor was convinced that Client responded in self-defense and defense of her property. We entered a plea resolution reducing the case to Disorderly Conduct, no jail, $200 fine, no probation and rescission of the No-Contact Order. Client also entered a Deferred Sentence dismissing the case after 18 months of law-abiding behavior.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.03.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was cited for Possession of Marijuana under Bellingham Municipal Code 10.08.020. She was approached by police in her parked vehicle while smoking marijuana. At first, the Prosecutor wanted her to plead guilty as charged, serve a mandatory minimum day in jail and pay a $300 fine. Through careful negotiations, however, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to amend the charges to Possession of Paraphernalia under RCW 69.50.412. This amendment/reduction circumvented the mandatory day in jail that a Possession of Marijuana charge brings. In lieu of jail, Client agreed to serve 16 hours of community service and pay a $493 fine. Additionally, Mr. Ransom also negotiated no probation. Finally, the Prosecutor and judge allowed Client to enter a Deferred Sentence allowing dismissal of the charges after one year of law-abiding behavior.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.13.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Malicious Mischief Third Degree under RCW 9A.48.090 and Minor in Possession and/or Consumption of Alcohol (MIP) under RCW 66.44.270(2)(a). Each charge is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 fine, mandatory evaluations with treatment and 2-5 years active probation. Client was caught “tagging” graffiti on a local business while under the influence of intoxicants. Despite the charges, Mr. Ransom assembled a strong merit package and approached the Prosecutor with creative solutions to resolving the matter. Prosecutor agreed to dismiss the MIP and enter a Deferred Sentence on the remaining Malicious Mischief charge. This resolution allowed dismissal of the Malicious Mischief conviction after 1 year. Client also successfully avoided jail and probation.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.05.2015

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Criminal Trespass First Degree for allegedly trespassing into the private property of a wooded area belonging to a nearby Indian reservation. The tribal property runs through the Canadian border. Client was not a tribal member. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed Client was never warned on previous occasions that they could not enter the property. Mr. Ransom also assembled a favorable merit package which effectively humanized Client before the eyes of the Prosecutor. Based on this – and the lack of evidence regarding any suspicion of lateral nefarious activities – Prosecutor agreed to dismiss the case under a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) agreement.

Case Conclusion Date: 12.16.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit and Run Unattended under RCW 46.52.010. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year jail and a $5,000 fine. Mr. Ransom contacted the complaining witness and persuaded him to accept monetary payment for the damage to his property. He also agreed to sign a declaration in support of Mr. Ransom’s motion to dismiss the case under Compromise of Misdemeanor pursuant to RCW 10.22.010. The Judge granted the Prosecutor’s motion to dismiss the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 12.09.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Negligent Driving First Degree. He executed a U-Turn on a dark county highway late at night and near a local casino he frequented earlier. Client was investigated for DUI. He was taken to the police station and provided a breath test sample of .06. Although Client breath test was below .08, the Prosecutor charged Client with Negligent Driving in the First Degree under RCW 46.61.5249. This is a simple misdemeanor exposing my client to 90 days jail, $1,000 fine, alcohol evaluation, treatment, 2 years of active probation and DOL consequences of 6 months of mandatory Ignition interlock Device with an Ignition Interlock Device License. Mr. Ransom assembled a favorable merit package and carefully negotiated dismissal of the charges with the Prosecutor. In exchange for the dismissal, Client was found “committed” on the traffic infraction of Negligent Driving Second Degree. The infraction included a small fine. Client paid the fine and left court a happy man with no criminal convictions, jail time, probation or Department of Licensing consequences.

Case Conclusion Date: 12.02.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged as an accomplice to Shoplifting under BMC 10.12.020. The co-defendant entered a grocery store, grabbed a box of wine, departed the store without paying and walked to client’s car. Client drove away unaware that co-defendant committed a crime. I engaged favorable negotiations with Prosecutor. We agreed to enter a Deferred Sentence allowing dismissal of the charges after one year of law-abiding behavior.

Case Conclusion Date: 12.02.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV under RCW 9A.36.041 following an altercation with her significant other. Allegedly, Client was mentally and physically abusive toward the victim and tried preventing the victim from leaving her home. Mr. Ransom formulated strong defenses consisting of Self-Defense and Necessity. Our theory was that victim was highly intoxicated, argumentative, physically abusive and tried to drive home drunk. After extensive interviews with the victim and witnesses, Prosecutor offered to dismiss the case if Client completed a DV evaluation and treatment. Fortunately, Client obtained a favorable evaluation and completed an 8-session DV treatment program. Prosecutor dismissed the case as agreed. Client successfully avoided a criminal conviction, jail, court fines, firearms restrictions, and probation. Also, the judge rescinded the no-contact order.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.08.2008

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client faced serious felony “strike offense” charges of Burglary First Degree and Assault Second Degree . He unwittingly participated in a home invasion involving a gang rivalry where the victim was brutally beaten. Also, the Burglary charge was a Class A felony exposing Client to life in prison (25 years) and $50,000 fine. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom’s pretrial investigations revealed Client took no part in the home invasion; nor did he have any knowledge that his co-defendants were involved, either. Mr. Ransom filed a Knapstad Motion to dismiss. Later, Mr. Ransom and Prosecutor entered a favorable resolution. Prosecutor dismissed the felonies in exchange for client pleading guilty to the misdemeanor charge of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer under RCW 9A.76.020. Client received no jail, paid minimum fines and was not monitored by DOC or a parole officer.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.26.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Reckless Driving under RCW 46.61.500 following a traffic accident. This is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, $5,000.00 court fines, drug/alcohol treatment (if necessary), 5 years of probation, mandatory 30-day license suspension and a substantial increase auto insurance rates. Client is a career Navy veteran with rank/privileges granted to him through years of service and hard work. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom constructed an excellent merit package on client’s behalf and presented it to the Prosecutor. As a result, we entered favorable negotiations. Prosecutor offered dismissal if Client accepted a committed traffic infraction of Failure to Yield under RCW 46.61.205 and a $124 fine. Since Failure to Yield is not a crime we avoided jail, evaluations, treatment, probation and the mandatory 30-day license suspension associated with Reckless Driving convictions. Additionally, the plea resolution included language preventing a potential lawsuit from the other motorist involved in the accident. Best of all, the resolution preserved Client’s military rank and privileges. Client was pleased we resolved the case well before he was deployed to Virginia later this year.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.11.2014

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Client was charged with Rape in the First Degree and Kidnapping First Degree. Both crimes are Class A felonies exposing the defendant to a possible life term in prison (25 years), lifelong registration as a sex offender, restitution to the victim, and potentially $50,000.00 in court fines. The alleged victim reported the defendant and another male coerced her into a car and forcibly raped her outside of a house party they all attended earlier. Despite the allegations, the client claimed the sexual acts were consensual. The victim’s Rape Kit medical examination showed no evidence of forced sexual assault. The victim’s blood analysis also revealed strong evidence of intoxicants in her system. While the case was pending, Mr. Ransom persuaded the judge to lower the defendant’s bail because he had no prior criminal history. Later, Mr. Ransom successfully argued a Motion to Compel an interview with the alleged victim. Mr. Ransom also successfully entered an Omnibus Order directing the Prosecutor to provide all of their pretrial discovery early and before the trial date (police reports, photographs, witness statements, medical reports, etc.). Later, it was discovered the victim did not want to cooperate with investigations. The case proceeded to jury trial. However, Prosecutor dismissed all charges in light of the lack of evidence, substantive defenses and uncooperative victim.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.17.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Felony Theft Second Degree following allegations of taking expensive items from a department store. Unfortunately, Client risked losing his gainful employment if he was convicted of the charges. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom negotiated a favorable resolution allowing dismissal of the case under a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). To earn the dismissal, Client agreed to avoid more criminal charges and/or convictions, enter counseling and complete 16 hours of community service. Client also avoided serving jail.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.15.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was cited for Hit & Run Attended under RCW 46.52.020. While driving his vehicle, Client accidentally bumped into another motorist’s rear bumper. Client got out of his car, inspected the alleged victim’s vehicle, and tried discussing the matter civilly. The alleged victim immediately argued with Client and got on her cell phone. Seeing no damage to her vehicle – and believing she was calling a friend or family member to possibly arrive and assault him – Client drove his vehicle away from the scene. Later, police contacted Client and cited him for Hit & Run. This crime is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine and a 30-day license suspension. Worse, a criminal conviction could have motivated the alleged victim to file a lawsuit against Client. Mr. Ransom contacted the alleged victim in an effort to compensate her and dismiss the case under the Compromise of Misdemeanor components of RCW 10.22. Unfortunately, her demands were outrageously unreasonable and unsubstantiated by any estimates. Next, Mr. Ransom filed and drafted a Knapstad Motion to dismiss under the argument that Client did, in fact, contact the alleged victim after the incident happened and did not simply drive away. The filing of the Knapstad Motion started fruitful negotiations with the Prosecutor. We entered a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) allowing dismissal of the case after one year of good behavior, 16 hours of community service and $500 restitution payment to the alleged victim. All parties were satisfied with the outcome.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.07.2014

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges

Description: Client charged with Reckless Driving under RCW 46.51.500 and Disorderly Conduct under RCW 9A.84.030. The Reckless Driving charge is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to 1 year in jail, a $5,000.00 fine and a 30-day license suspension. Client was sitting in his car and patiently waiting for the newly-trained boat launch authorities to process him and his boat. Client allegedly began cursing at the boat launch guards and aggressively drove his vehicle away from the launch line. The guards contacted the police and cited Client for Reckless Driving and Disorderly Conduct. Mr. Ransom interviewed the witnesses and police officers. It became clear the newly-opened boat launch was a chaotic, frustrating mess. Prosecutor dismissed all charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.23.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree following a debacle at a local tavern. Supposedly, the alleged victim was an active member of the PTA. Consequently, the Prosecutor did not believe the defendant responded in self-defense to being punched in the face by the alleged victim. Mr. Ransom successfully obtained medical records and photographic evidence showing the defendant suffered a broken nose during the incident. Mr. Ransom also successfully argued a Motion to Compel the Prosecutor to disclose the criminal histories of the victim and witnesses. Through these pretrial motions and investigations, Mr. Ransom discovered the “alleged victim” and witnesses had prior criminal convictions showing assaultive behavior and crimes of dishonesty. This evidence crippled the Prosecutor’s case. Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to avoid trial and enter favorable negotiations. The case was dismissed pursuant to a Deferred Sentence.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.07.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Malicious Mischief Third Degree. He was walking his dog on a dog trial. The alleged victim was sitting in a vehicle blocking the trail. Client asked the man to move his vehicle off the trail. The two argued. The motorist started his car and aggressively drove it toward Client in an intimidating fashion. Fearing for his life, Client stepped aside and simultaneously shattered the motorist’s car windshield with his elbow. Client said he responded in self-defense to the motorist’s driving, and that elbowing the windshield was done from necessity. Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a dismissal in light of client’s affirmative defenses.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.11.2014

Outcome: Dismissed all Charges Except Possession of Marijuana

Description: Client was arrested and jailed for Robbery, Drive-By Shooting, Unlawful Possession of a Firearm and Felony Possession of Marijuana along with two other suspects. However, it was later discovered the officers lacked sufficient evidence showing his involvement. Mr. Ransom’s interview with the alleged victim revealed numerous inconsistencies. Her credibility was brought to question. Later, Mr. Ransom drafted and filed a 3.6 Motion to Dismiss the case for lack of probable cause. Before arguing the motion, however, Mr. Ransom negotiated a favorable settlement with Prosecutor. Client agreed to plead guilty to Possession of Marijuana and Conspiracy to Commit Theft. All other charges were dismissed. Client received credit for time served. He was immediately released from jail and reunited with his family. This highly favorable resolution avoided a “strike offense” conviction, years of prison, parole and probation.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.12.2014

Outcome: Entered Favorable Resolution Avoiding Sex Offense and Prison

Description: Client was charged with Rape in the Second Degree and Child Molestation Second Degree. The charges were a mixture of Class A and Class B felonies exposing Client to a maximum 25 years in prison, mandatory registration as a sex offender in Washington State, sexual deviancy evaluations, years of treatment, payment of court fines and restitution to the victim. The case was galvanizing because the allegations involved a child. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom’s pretrial interviews with the victim and subsequent investigations uncovered weaknesses in the Prosecutor’s case. Consequently, Mr. Ransom drafted numerous motions to challenge the victim’s competence, suppress the victim’s hearsay statements and circumvent Washington’s Rape-Shield Statute to admit statements the victim made which undermined her credibility. Mr. Ransom also persuaded the judge to allow investigations into the victim’s school disciplinary records and CPS records. Moreover, Mr. Ransom successfully argued that Washington’s Public Disclosure laws allow investigations into the arresting officer’s disciplinary records. These tactics – as well as the information obtained from them – facilitated successful negotiations with the Prosecutor. Client pled guilty to Assault in the Fourth Degree with Sexual Motivation and agreed to serve 6 months jail. Client avoided prison, sex convictions and sex-offense registration. Ultimately, the negotiated plea was a highly favorable resolution in light of the charges he faced.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.18.2014

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges And Infractions

Description: Client charged with DUI, Hit & Run Attended and Unsafe/Improper Backing of a Vehicle. Client and alleged victim had a minor argument while driving separate vehicles. Victim contacted law enforcement and said my client struck her vehicle and drove away (Hit & Run). The police arrived and immediately suspected Client was under the influence of drugs or alcohol. The Trooper obtained a search warrant for a blood test and incarcerated my client. At arraignment, the judge ordered Client to immediately install an Ignition Interlock Device (IID). At first, Prosecutor wanted Client to plead guilty to all charges. Instead of accepting the State’s plea offer, we decided to press the offensive. The blood test results showed Client was not under the influence of any intoxicants. Also, there was no evidence showing damage to the victim’s car. Consequently, Mr. Ransom filed a Knapstad Motion to Dismiss. Instead of arguing the motions, the Prosecutor agreed to dismiss all charges. At the dismissal hearing, Mr. Ransom persuaded the judge to sign a Court Order mandating the immediate removal of the IID from Client’s vehicle.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.21.2014

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with two counts of Communicating With a Minor For Immoral Purposes under RCW 9.68A.090. These are Class C Felony sex offenses punishable up to 5 years prison and a $10,000.00 fine. Convicted defendants must also register as sex offenders. The alleged facts involved lurid communications over the internet. Despite the challenges, Mr. Ransom undertook the multi-layered task of (1) relaying positive information about my client to the Prosecutor while the case was pending, (2) convincing the Prosecutor to reduce the charges to something other than felonies and sex offenses; and (3) preparing for trial should negotiations fail. During negotiations, Mr. Ransom constructed a “merit package” consisting of character reference letters and other documents showing that, despite the charges, Client was an otherwise upstanding and law-abiding citizen who was respected by his employer, family and friends. Although Mr. Ransom’s negotiations with the Prosecutor were professional and fairly reasonable, we failed to reach a settlement which prevented my client from registering as a sex offender. Consequently, we requested a jury trial. At this point, our strategy was to conduct recorded interviews with the alleged victims for the purposes of (1) showing inconsistencies in their statements, (2) revealing they were not competent to testify, and/or (3) showing they misrepresented themselves over the internet. Our strategy prompted more negotiations with the Prosecutor. Eventually, Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.10.2013

Outcome: Pled Guilty to Assault Fourth Degree, Avoided Felony Sex Offense and Prison

Description: Client was charged with Rape in the Second Degree and Assault Fourth Degree. The alleged rape charge was Class A Felony exposing him to a maximum 25 years in prison, mandatory registration as a sex offender in Washington State, sexual deviancy evaluations, years of treatment, payment of court fines and restitution to the victim. Mr. Ransom’s pretrial investigations uncovered flaws and weaknesses in the case. Consequently, Mr. Ransom drafted numerous motions to challenge the victim’s competence, suppress evidence and dismiss the case. These tactics facilitated successful negotiations with the Prosecutor. Client pled to Assault Fourth Degree and agreed to serve 6 months jail. He received no prison sentence, no sex convictions, no sex offense registration, no probation, no sexual deviance evaluations, no treatment and no community custody. Ultimately, the negotiated plea was a much shorter sentence than his potential exposure to a Rape 2° conviction.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.09.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV. He and his long-term, live-in girlfriend had an escalated argument. The evidence consisted of a recorded 911 Call and photographic evidence of her injuries. Nevertheless, Mr. Ransom interviewed the alleged victim. He obtained a statement from her describing what really happened on the night of the incident. She also moved away while the case was pending trial. Prosecutor dismissed. Afterward, the no-contact orders were rescinded.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.17.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Theft Third Degree for allegedly stole a swing set from the sidewalk in front of someone’s front yard. Client believed the swing set was offered free of charge. We entered successful negotiations with the prosecutor allowing dismissal of the charges after one year of law-abiding behavior. Client completed her obligations.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.05.2013

Outcome: Dismissed All Charges And Infractions

Description: Client was charged with Hit and Run Attended, Operating a Motor Vehicle Without Insurance and Inattentive Driving. Hit and Run Unattended is a gross misdemeanor punishable up to a year in jail, $5,000.00 fine and a 30-day license suspension. On the day of the incident, Client bought a used car. While driving the vehicle, he stopped at a traffic light. While waiting for the light to change, the driver behind him stopped their own vehicle closely behind Client. Unfortunately, as the light turned green, Client’s car moved slightly backward and bumped the alleged victim’s vehicle. Client felt no impact and drove away. The person whom Client accidentally struck, however, chased Client and called 911. The police arrived, arrested Client and charged him with Hit and Run Attended and the aforementioned infractions. Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated dismissals on all charges. Client dutifully followed Mr. Ransom’s advice to improve his situation in the eyes of the victim and prosecutor. Consequently, Prosecutor agreed to reduce the Hit and Run charges and enter a Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) which effectively dismisses the Hit and Run conviction after one year. The downward reduction also avoided an immediate 30-day license suspension. Client served no jail and paid a $300 fine. Additionally, Prosecutor dismissed the trailing infractions. These reductions saved $800 in fines and avoided a bad driving record.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.13.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Unlawful Imprisonment DV under RCW 9A.40.040(1). This is a Class C Felony punishable up to 5 years jail and $10,000.00 fine. On the date of the incident, Client and his wife consumed alcohol and became intoxicated. She became abusive toward him. She also threatened to immediately leave the home and drive away in their car. In response, Client briefly locked his wife away in the utility room of their home. He was concerned for his wife’s safety and the safety of other people if she left the home and operated a motor vehicle. While inside the utility room, his wife called police. They arrived and investigated the incident. Immediately, Client’s wife was remorseful for contacting police. She did not want Client arrested. Unfortunately, and pursuant to RCW 10.99.030 and RCW 10.31.100, police officers MUST arrest individuals and take them to jail in situations like this. After being charged with a felony, the court entered a No-Contact Order between Client and his wife and child. Client was forced to live with a friend. While the case was pending, Client was offered 30 days jail in exchange for his guilty plea. Client rejected the offer and demanded a jury trial. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed Client’s wife wanted the charges dismissed, she wanted the No-Contact Orders rescinded and that she overreacted by contacting police. Client’s defense was Self-Defense and Necessity. On the day of trial, Prosecutor dismissed the case. The judge rescinded the No-Contact Orders. Client and his wife walked out of court; happy to be reunited.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.09.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client was charged with Assault Fourth Degree under RCW 9A.36.041. Both the client and the alleged victim moved to another state while the case was pending. Mr. Ransom successfully entered friendly negotiations with the City’s Prosecutor to waive client’s presence at all pretrial hearings. This avoided the chance of client obtaining a warrant. Mr. Ransom also worked with the Prosecutor to combine our investigative resources to try and locate the alleged victim, who ultimately could not be found. Prosecutor dismissed the case.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.24.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Minor in Possession of Alcohol (MIP) under RCW 66.44.270(2)(a). Under the statute, the State must prove either (1) the defendant was exhibiting the effects of consuming alcohol, or (2) is in possession of or close proximity to a container that has or recently had liquor in it. Mr. Ransom drafted and filed a Knapstad Motion to Dismiss. Here, there was no evidence of consumption or close proximity. Prosecutor dismissed the case.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.09.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Here, Client immediately hired Mr. Ransom to resolve the situation and mitigate potential drug/felony charges before they were filed by Prosecutor. Through quick action, Mr. Ransom convinced authorities to file the case within a municipality instead of the County. This avoided felony charges. Thereafter, Mr. Ransom contact Prosecutor and successfully negotiated the gross misdemeanor drug charge to Disorderly Conduct, which is a non-drug simple misdemeanor. Even better, the Disorderly Conduct shall be dismissed in two years if the client avoids any further law violations. This was a very favorable resolution which ultimately avoided both a drug charge and a felony. Also, Client may continue to travel through the U.S./Canada border.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.04.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit and Run Unattended under RCW 46.52.010. Mr. Ransom contacted the victim and persuaded him to enter a Compromise of Misdemeanor under RCW 10.22.010. As a result, Client paid the damages to victim’s property in exchange for a signed Declaration from the victim stating he did not want Client prosecuted, and that he indeed received compensation for his damaged property. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.07.2013

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Unlawful Aiming or Discharging a Firearm under RCW 9.41.270 following an incident with a gang of hoodlums who lived nearby his home. One day, they threw debris at client’s vehicle as he drove by. Client stopped his vehicle. They rushed toward him, presumably to attack. Client pulled out his handgun in self-defense and pointed it toward them. The hoodlums ran away. Later, police contacted Client, seized his handgun and charged/arrested him. During plea negotiations, the Prosecutor offered a lower charge, however, Prosecutor also wanted to strip Client of his gun rights and keep his gun forever. Client refused the plea offer. We immediately sought trial. Our defenses were Self-Defense. On the day of trial, the Prosecutor dismissed the case. Client retained his gun rights, avoided a criminal conviction and had his firearm returned.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.14.2013

Outcome: Reduced Felony Drug Charge to Disorderly Conduct

Description: Client was charged with Possession of Cocaine. He was Canadian citizen driving into the U.S. through the Peace Arch Border. He was accompanied by two friends. His vehicle was searched. Border Patrol found a small baggie of cocaine residue. Client was unaware the drugs were in his vehicle because he allowed other friends to recently drive his vehicle. Mr. Ransom filed a pretrial motion arguing suppression of the evidence due to the questionable nature of the alleged possession. Mr. Ransom also constructed a favorable merit package describing Client’s lack of criminal history, education and willingness to undergo treatment. Most important, Mr. Ransom persuasively described how a drug conviction would substantially harm the client’s present and future career/profession. The Prosecutor agreed to enter a favorable resolution to a simple misdemeanor conviction. The resolution also avoided a drug conviction, felonies and jail. Best of all, Client may continue to enter the U.S. for business purposes.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.14.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Second Degree DV, a Class B felony, and Unlawful Imprisonment DV, a Class C felony. If guilty, he faced 13-17 months in prison. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed alleged victim was highly intoxicated, instigated confrontation, did not want to testify and client responded in Self-Defense. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.29.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Unlawful Imprisonment DV, a class C Felony; Interfering with Reporting of Domestic Violence DV and Malicious Mischief Third Degree DV; the remaining two which are gross misdemeanors. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed alleged victim did not want to testify. Mr. Ransom also persuaded the Prosecutor’s decision by providing many positive character reference witnesses, revealing lack of criminal history, obtaining a domestic violence evaluation showing no significant problems and revealing Client’s desire to seek couples counseling. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.31.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree (DV) and Violation of a No-Contact Order (DV). Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed alleged victim did not want to testify. There were no other witnesses, the evidence of assault was weak, and if physical contact occurred then it was unintentional. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.21.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with 13 Counts of Trafficking in Stolen Property First Degree and 1 Count Theft Second Degree, all Class C felonies. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed he was a “scrapper” by trade, and had agreements with many – including the alleged victim; a former employer – that he could indeed scrap discarded materials from construction projects. Investigations also revealed former employer had many EEOC complaints and reports filed against him. Although hearsay, the reports were admissible before a jury because they were governmental business records. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.16.2012

Description: Client charged with Possession of Cocaine With Intent to Deliver (6 Counts), a Class B felony, and Possession of Marijuana Over 40 Grams (1 Count), a Class C felony. This case was over 2o years old. Nevertheless, Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the police officers were still available to testify. Also, the crime lab still possessed the contraband evidence. Mr. Ransom constructed a merit package consisting of numerous character reference letters and other mitigating information. With this information, the Prosecutor and I worked out an extremely generous resolution. All cocaine drug dealing charges were dismissed. The Possession of Marijuana felony was reduced to Criminal Solicitation; a gross misdemeanor. Client would only serve 5 days in jail, complete 240 hours community service, pay minimal fines and undergo no drug evaluations; treatment or probation. The outcome saved Client’s employment as a caregiver and bonded business owner.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.31.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed alleged victim did not want to testify. There were no independent witnesses, spotty evidence of assault, and “assault” was unintentional. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.03.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit and Run Attended, a gross misdemeanor. Mr. Ransom investigated the case, contacted the alleged victim and negotiated a resolution where client would pay the damages to the victim’s vehicle. Following this, and under RCW 10.22, Mr. Ransom sought a Compromise of Misdemeanor. This resolution allows full dismissal of the charges if the victim submits documentation that the damages are paid and the victim does not want to seek prosecution. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.09.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed no testifying witnesses and alleged victim did not want to testify. Also, the incident was reported days after it allegedly happened. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 04.18.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit and Run Unattended. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed no witnesses to the incident. Later, Mr. Ransom contacted the alleged victim and negotiated a resolution where client would pay the damages to the victim’s vehicle. Following this, Mr. Ransom effectively negotiated a Compromise of Misdemeanor. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 07.09.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV, a gross misdemeanor. She argued with her boyfriend about text messages he received from his ex-girlfriend. They wrestled over the his iPhone. She struck him defensively with her open palm. He suffered a bloody nose. Neighbors contacted police. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed lack of witnesses, that Client responded in self-defense and alleged victim did not want to testify. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.23.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Unlawful Possession of Adderol, Unlawful Possession of Suboxone, Unlawful Possession of Vicoprofen and Unlawful Possession of Marijuana. Client was pulled over at the Peace Arch border to Canada for accidentally travelling in the Nexus lane. The search by police revealed Client’s unwitting possession of the drugs. Client was licensed pharmacist. Investigations revealed she took the prescription drugs away from a drug-abusing friend she visited while travelling on a different date. The friend was willing to testify on client’s behalf. Mr. Ransom negotiated a 2-year Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC). Prosecutor dismissed after client obtained a state-certified drug evaluation, followed the treatment recommendations and performed 240 hours of community service. The dismissal saved Client’s pharmaceutical license from being revoked.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.10.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Second Degree DV, a Class B felony, and Assault Fourth Degree DV, a gross misdemeanor. Client alleged to have assaulted and choked girlfriend at his parent’s home and with the parents within earshot of the incident. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed no independent evidence of Assault, no injuries, no 911 call, and no witnesses. Client’s girlfriend did not want to testify. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.11.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with 2 Counts Violation of a No-Contact Order, both Class B felonies (due to client’s prior NCOV convictions). Client allegedly stalked ex-girlfriend with “drive-by glaring” and parking his vehicle in front of her home in violation of the No-Contact Order. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed no independent witnesses, no photographs and no phone contacts. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.18.2012

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Second Degree DV, a Class B felony. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed Client was the roommate of alleged victim, who instigated a confrontation with Client. Later, the alleged victim was incarcerated and imprisoned for felony charges of Possession With Intent to Distribute Heroin. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.02.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client faced Violation of No-Contact Order charges from the City of Lynden and the City of Bellingham. Both charges are gross misdemeanors. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed Client suffered from mental health issues which diminished her capacity to form the requisite intent to commit the crimes. Also, Client suffered a harsh breakup with her ex-boyfriend. Against her will, and while the cases were pending, the alleged victim kept a substantial amount of Client’s personal belongings. Mr. Ransom contacted the alleged victim and obtained his written statement and cooperation. He returned client’s personal property. He also did not want to testify against Client. Mr. Ransom shared his investigations and the alleged victim’s statement with the City Prosecutors. The Prosecutors agreed to dismiss their various cases.

Case Conclusion Date: 02.07.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV. On the day of the incident, Client ordered daughter to move out of the house. During the move-out, daughter attacked client. Client responded in self-defense. Daughter called 911. Police arrived at the scene and determined that client was the primary aggressor. Police arrested Client and booked her into jail. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the alleged victim, client’s daughter, had a long criminal history and was heavily abusing drugs. On the day of trial, Prosecutor dismissed for lack of evidence.

Case Conclusion Date: 01.28.2010

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Attempted Robbery in the First Degree and Assault Second Degree With a Deadly Weapon. Both charges are Class B felonies. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed client responded by defending her friends against the victim’s unprovoked attack. Later, Mr. Ransom discovered the alleged victim moved out of State, and was unavailable to testify. Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to dismiss.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.04.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree DV, Resisting Arrest and Obstructing a Police Officer. All charges are gross misdemeanors. Investigations revealed police officers responded to 911 call and that Client was uncooperative. Fortunately, Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to entered a 2-year Stipulated Order of Continuance (SOC) agreement with stipulations that Client would undergo DV evaluation and treatment, pay $250 fine and serve no jail. Eventually, the case was dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 08.09.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Second Degree With a Deadly Weapon (Class B Felony) and Malicious Mischief Second Degree (Class C Felony). The facts alleged client was part of a gang-related beating of the victim and the destruction of property. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed no independent witnesses could positively identify Client. We set the matter for jury trial. Prosecutor dismissed for lack of evidence.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.16.2010

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Second Degree, a Class B felony, following a small riot at Boulevard Park in Bellingham. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed Client was trying to stop the riot because the parties involved were his friends. The victim(s) suffered no injuries, and none were willing to testify against client. Prosecutor dismissed.

Case Conclusion Date: 10.12.2010

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree, a gross misdemeanor. He allegedly attacked an old acquaintance outside of a bar. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed the acquaintance burglarized the client years before and stole numerous family heirlooms; including antique firearms belonging to client’s father. Mr. Ransom shared this information with the City’s Prosecutor, who agreed to amend the Assault to Disorderly Conduct, a simple misdemeanor. The judge ordered client to serve 1 day jail, pay $300 fine, no evaluations and no probation. Judge also imposed a 2-year Deferred Sentence, meaning Client’s case shall be dismissed after 2 years.

Case Conclusion Date: 03.07.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Reckless Driving, a gross misdemeanor. He was alleged to have compared speeds with his brother after a family gathering. Client was employed as a delivery driver. His job was in jeopardy because of these charges. Mr. Ransom instructed client to attend an Aggressive Driving class and obtain numerous character reference letters. He followed my advice. Prosecutor agreed to reduce the charge to Negligent Driving First Degree, no jail, and a $500 fine. However, Prosecutor would not agree to a 1-year Deferred Sentence. Despite the Prosecutor’s objections, the judge followed Mr. Ransom’s recommendations and entered a Deferred Sentence allowing dismissal of the case after one year of good behavior.

Case Conclusion Date: 05.20.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Assault Fourth Degree, a gross misdemeanor, against a co-worker. Investigations revealed the victim antagonized the situation and called police in order to get client terminated from employment. There were no witnesses or injuries to the allegations. Mr. Ransom persuaded Prosecutor to enter a Deferred Sentence setting up the eventual dismissal of the charges.

Case Conclusion Date: 09.09.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Reckless Endangerment and Unlawful Discharge of Firearm. Both charges are gross misdemeanors. Mr. Ransom’s investigations revealed client was intoxicated while cleaning his rifle. It accidentally shot a round through his bedroom wall and into a neighbor’s fence. Prosecutor agreed to enter Deferred Sentence where case shall be dismissed after one year of law-abiding behavior. The judge imposed a $300 fine, no alcohol evaluations, no probation and no jail. Mr. Ransom arranged for police to return confiscated firearms to client.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.14.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Hit and Run Attended and Assault Fourth Degree, both gross misdemeanors. He was a Canadian motorist who allegedly struck a pedestrian with his vehicle in the parking lot of a department store. Investigations revealed no injuries, no witnesses, the alleged victim suffered numerous mental health issues and she fabricated the entire story to try and sue client for damages in civil court.

Case Conclusion Date: 11.14.2011

Outcome: Dismissed

Description: Client charged with Boating Under the Influence, a gross misdemeanor. Police boarded Client’s vessel after receiving reports that Client was maneuvering his boat to the pier in a reckless and aggressive manner. Mr. Ransom assembled a favorable merit package and persuaded Prosecutor to enter a 1-year Deferred Sentence which included no jail, $500 fine and no probation.

Island County’s insurance pool has reached a $150,000 settlement with the woman who was allegedly held captive in a Freeland cabin three years ago, an attorney in the case said Monday.

The 2006 incident was one of the biggest scandals in memory for the Island County Sheriff’s Office.

Victoria Walker told police she was held against her will and assaulted by Matthew Friar, a childhood friend, during their stay at his family’s summer home on Shoreview Drive in February 2006. She called 911 twice, but the deputy who responded to the first call left without talking to anyone in the cabin and never came back when Walker called for police for help a second time.

Walker escaped from the home the morning after she was held captive and called police from a stranger’s cellphone at nearby Freeland Park.

Jay Wallace, the deputy on duty who was supposed to respond to the 911 calls, was later fired and the controversy over the 911 calls derailed his campaign for county sheriff.

Walker filed a $250,000 claim for damages against Island County on Nov. 12, 2008.

In the claim, she said Wallace was negligent in responding to the 911 calls, and said the county had not properly trained and supervised its officers. Wallace said she had suffered “severe and serious injuries” because of the incident, as well as mental anguish, shame, humiliation, indignity and a loss of employment.

Her claim sought $150,000 for negligence, $50,0000 for outrage and $50,000 in punitive damages. A damage claim is a necessary first step before a lawsuit can be filed.

Alex Ransom, a criminal defense lawyer based in Bellingham and Walker’s attorney, said the Washington Counties Risk Pool agreed to settle the case on behalf of Island County for $150,000 on Feb. 4.

Ransom said Walker repeatedly told him the case was never about money.

“She just wants to make sure that this kind of thing never happens again,” he said.

He added that county officials handled Walker’s claim and the ensuing negotiations with professionalism and dignity.

“They got rid of their glaring problem and that was Deputy Wallace,” he said.

“Everybody’s happy and that’s really what justice is about,” Ransom said.