Source: http://www.criminalandtrafficattorney.com/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 23:06:49+00:00

Document:
Seattle Criminal Lawyers: Yan Siprin Criminal Defense Attorney, Seattle Metro.
We practice Criminal, Traffic, Personal Injury, Insurance Law and Litigation. We regularly practice in Superior and District Courts in Seattle, Tacoma, Bellevue, Redmond, Issaquah, Kirkland, Renton, Everett, Arlington, Monroe and other cities. Yan Siprin has over thirteen years of legal experience. Yan Siprin's prior experience includes working at WaMu Bank (now Chase) and Baker & McKenzie (one of the largest law firms in the world).
Schedule your FREE FIRST CONSULTATION. During your consultation, we will determine the scope of work required and the cost involved so that you know exactly what to expect.
Criminal Lawyer, Traffic Law & Personal Injury Attorney.
Our law firm focuses on helping people to fight charges of DUI/DWI, Reckless Driving, Negligent Driving, Theft, Illegal Fishing or other misdemeanors.
We can help you to dismiss your ticket or to prevent the increase in your auto insurance. We have an excellent record in dismissing speeding tickets in King, Snohomish and Pierce Counties.
We will help you with all aspects of your personal injury case (bodily injuries and damages to your vehicle). We have the experience, compassion and history of successive results.
If you have been charged with a crime that involves domestic violence (against a member of your family or your spouse or a member of your household), you need to contact attorney immediately. Any time assault or battery is coupled with domestic violence (also referred by its abbreviation "DV") against a member of your family or household, roommate , present or ex girlfriend/boyfriend.
Prosecutors treat DV cases very seriously. Most often, the court would issue a restraining or no-contact order and you would not only be able to precluded from contacting the person but even go near their residence or work. The DV charge alone (not even a conviction) can seriously interfere with your current or future employment. Once charges, (i) if you own a gun, you may be ordered to turn in your gun and if convicted, you will lose the right to own one and (ii) you should not be contacting the alleged DV victim, this should be done by your attorney. We highly recommend that you get an attorney asap and do not try to handle the DV charge by yourself.
Driving under the influence (DUI) applies not only alcohol but to operating a vehicle under legal and illegal drugs (i.e., including the drugs you can buy over the counter). See RCW 46.61.502 .
It is a common misconception that a driver could only be charged with the DUI if his/her amount of alcohol in the blood is 0.08 or higher for 21 and over OR, for anyone under 21, if the alcohol in the driver’s blood is 0.02 or higher. In Washington, a driver could get charged with the DUI without any regards for the concentration of alcohol in the breath or blood, with the only requirement that a driver is driving a vehicle under the influence or affected by alcohol, any drug, or a combination of thereof. Thus, for example, if you are over 21, and if a police officer can allege that you appeared as you were driving under the influence of alcohol and, if upon measuring alcohol level in your blood, the test would show 0.06, you could still be charged with the DUI.
If convicted of DUI, there is mandatory jail time and fines as well required alcohol classes, driver's license suspension and a consequence, much higher insurance rates as well as ignition interlock requirements ( see SR-22 requirements). If you are charged with the DUI, you need to immediately contact an attorney who can help you protect your legal rights.
Besides the obvious criminal charge, there are DOL implications, see DUI (Driving Under the Influence) , see also WAC 308-103 . If you are cited with the DUI, the DOL will record this citation on your WA state driving record, suspend or revoke your driver's license (unless you prevail in the DOL hearing), and if you are licensed in another state, WA will notify the DOL in that state of revocation/conviction. If your DUI is amended to Reckless Driving, Negligent Driving, or some other charge, this reduced charge does not affect your suspension period (if any). Ignition Interlock Driver License (referred as "IIL") allows a person whose drivers license is revoked or suspended to drive an auto equipped with an Ignition interlock device (referred as "IID") . In essence, the IID will not let you start the engine if the IID detects alcohol on your breath. Further, the IID may require additional "retests" as you are driving.
If you are convicted of Reckless Driving (see RCW 46.61.500 ), the court will send the notice to the DOL to suspend the license. After the suspension ends, the DOL will amend your driving records. Under our state law, if you drive a vehicle "in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property", you are guilty of reckless driving. Reckless Driving is a gross misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for up to 364 days and by a fine of not more than $5,000.
Often, Reckless Driving is reduced to Negligent Driving 1st degree ("Neg 1"), see RCW 46.61.5249. Neg 1 does not trigger an automatic license suspension.
When the police allege that you were racing or "road raging", you would be charged with Reckless Driving and you would need to obtain SR-22 or "high risk" insurance ( see SR-22 requirements ). The cost of SR–22 insurance is based on the driving record.
Driving while license invalidated/suspended is defined in RCW 46.20.342 . While some people may think that this is not a big deal, it is nevertheless a crime thus it can affect your criminal record and your employment. Importantly, if you are found to be a "habitual offender", you are guilty of driving while license suspended or revoked in the first degree (a gross misdemeanor) with punishment by imprisonment for not less than ten days upon first conviction.
Per RCW 9A.56.050 , you are guilty of theft in the third degree if you commit theft of property or services which (a) does not exceed $750, or (b) includes ten or more merchandise pallets, or ten or more beverage crates, or a combination of ten or more merchandise pallets and beverage crates. In reality, you can get charged with Theft 3rd if you, for example, are wondering around the store, talking to your friend on a cell phone and accidentally leave the store with an item. You may have not intended to do this but you may nevertheless be charged with Theft 3rd. In our experience, it does not take much to get charged. For example, we represented someone who was charges for allegedly stealing an item valued at about $8 from a store. We have done many theft cases and never had our any of our clients had to plea guilty in a theft charge.
Chapter 77.15 is complex. If you are charges with a crime, we suggest that you immediately contact an attorney. See also http://wdfw.wa.gov/ on rules for fishing and hunting in Washington.
Technical violations of law may lead to dropping the charges or amending them to much lesser charges (e.g. DUI to Negligent Driving 1st degree). Understanding the law regarding (A) Arrests Process and (B) Searches and Seizures may help you better understand your criminal case. Below is a basic discussion to familiarize you with the concepts.
"Probable cause to believe a man has committed a crime on the street does not necessarily give rise to probable cause to search his home." See State v. Dalton.
In short, to seize an item, police must have probable cause to believe that such item is connected with the criminal activity and the police will find in place of search. State v. Thein.
In short, to arrest, the arresting officer needs to have probable cause which exists where the arresting officer has knowledge of facts and circumstances based on reasonably trustworthy information sufficient for a belief that a criminal act was committed. See State v. Graham. The existence of probable cause is determined by an objective standard. See State v. Graham, State v. Gaddy. In case of a DUI/DWI, per RCW 10.31.100(3)(e) , police officers may arrest a person without a warrant if they have probable cause to believe that the person is driving with a suspended or revoked driver's license. See also RCW 10.31.100 (Arrest without warrant).
You are arrested if you have been taken into a custody and are not free to walk away. The law required that you would be read your rights, commonly known as the "Miranda Rights". Once taken into a custody, you may be taking to a police station and, depending on a type of a violation, released or detained at least though your arraignment.
Supreme Courts' decision in Katz v. United States lays out the foundation for Fourth Amendment's application to search and seizure protections. Per Katz, an individual has a “reasonable expectation of privacy” which is determined by “exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy” but it must be the “one that society is prepared to recognize as ‘reasonable.’” Katz is the fundamental decision that was later the basis for developing Federal and Washington search and seizure protection law.
Fourth Amendment has its counterpart in Washington constitution's Article I, section 7 which states that “[n]o person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law.” In Washington, court apply State v. Gunwall to determine the scope of protection. Gunwall provides six factor test and the framework for analysis of each specific case. In addition to the law that has been codified in RCW 10.79 (addressing Search without warrant; Strip, body cavity searches, etc.), our state law is constantly developing and may differ from the federal law.
For example, in 2009, the US Supreme Court in Arizona v. Gant defined a scope of a warrantless automobile search incident to arrest. In 2012, our state Supreme Court in State v. Snapp declined to adopt US Supreme Court's interpretation of the Fourth Amendment for Washington's article I, section 7 and expanded the rights of defendants. In Washington, police has a legal right to search a vehicle only when there are concerns for police safety or destruction of evidence. Per Snapp, "[t]he protections guaranteed by article I, section 7 are qualitatively different from those under the Fourth Amendment."
Yan Siprin represents clients in Seattle, Bellevue, Kirkland, Issaquah, Redmond, Mercer Island, Renton, Kent, Auburn, Federal Way, Tacoma, Burien, Shoreline, Lynwood, Everett, Edmonds, Arlington, Mornoe and in other courts in King County, Snohomish County and Pierce County.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.