DUI: WI State vs. Mitchell: Implied Consent While Unconscious
The U.S. Supreme Court will decide soon whether police should be allowed to draw your blood while you are unconscious, without first obtaining a search warrant. State of Wisconsin vs. Mitchell: Can The Unconscious Give Consent? Specifically, the Supremes will decide whether your “implied consent” to breath/blood testing creates an exception to your 4th amendment
Read More
The Real Impact of I-1639 Part 1: Semiautomatic Assault Rifles
- By: Schöen Parnell
- I-1639
- March 19, 2019
- Comments (0)
Washington State recently passed Initiative 1639. This post discusses the very purposeful relabeling/reclassifying of your semiautomatic rifle as an assault weapon. Yes, beginning July 1, 2019, whether you own an AR-15 or just a little bitty Ruger 10/22, it magically transforms into an assault weapon. What I-1639 Does: All semiautomatic rifles and semiautomatic shotguns have
Read More
Use Of Force In Self-Defense: Bench vs. Jury Trial Rationale
- By: Schöen Parnell
- self-defense
- March 12, 2019
- Comments (0)
With the recent passing of Washington state’s I-1639 our firearm laws are back in the spotlight. A recent Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network newsletter featured ‘Attorney Question’ asked the following; What circumstances if any might lead you to ask for a bench trial to have a judge make a finding about criminal charges stemming from
Read MoreDUI While Armed
- By: Schöen Parnell
- WACDL
- July 8, 2013
- Comment (1)
Recently there’s been some chatter on the list-serve about hypothetical clients (HC) who are arrested for DUI and are either personally armed or have a firearm somewhere in the vehicle. The firearm ultimately gets seized and several different questions have arisen. First, let’s deal with the general issue of having a firearm in the vehicle,
Read MoreDealing with Hendrickson on a Corpus motion
- By: Schöen Parnell
- WACDL
- July 5, 2012
- Comments (0)
In State v. Hendrickson, 140 Wash.App. 913 (Div. II, 2007), the Division II Court of Appeals seems to disregard our own Supreme Court’s rule of law that mere ownership of a vehicle – coupled with presence at the scene – is insufficient to establish corpus delicti. This was established in the Washington Supreme Court’s review
Read More