Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

« The Morning News: Haiti Gets Hit By… | Gaming Demonstrates Inevitability o… »

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

City City Uncovers More Old Pot Cases, Backlog of Domestic Violence and DUI Cases

Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 9:14 AM

Newly elected City Attorney Pete Holmes has found more pot possession prosecutions filed under his predecessor, Tom Carr, than he previously believed were there. Since taking oath on Jan 4, Holmes has reviewed 25 active cases from Carr’s administration in which pot possession was the only charge. “I was surprised at the number,” says Holmes. “It seemed to grow as we dug into it.” Carr had insisted that pot cases—particularly those where the city filed no other charges—were extremely rare. “I understood on the campaign trail that it was a negligible number. I think that 25 is a pretty serious number,” says Holmes.

City attorney spokeswoman Kathy Mulady says, “It looks right now that they will all be dismissed by the end of the month.”

While reviewing cases left over from Carr, Holmes adds, “we found we have a backlog of domestic-violence cases and some DUI cases going back to 2008 that had never been filed. Instead of having lawyers working on these marijuana cases, we should have them working on DUI and domestic-violence cases.”

In addition to the 25 pot filings, the city attorney’s office examined 17 more pot cases referred by Seattle Police where no action has been taken yet, including some with marijuana as a secondary charge. Those cases, Mulady says, “will probably be referred back to the police department” and won’t be charged. In future cases where marijuana is a secondary charge, Mulady says plainly, “The marijuana charge will be dismissed.”

Comments (11) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment

You guys are literally the last ones to this story.
See here: http://post.thestranger.com/seattle/&quo…;">http://bit.ly/5XPPBz
Here: http://post.thestranger.com/seattle/&quo…;">http://bit.ly/805gTR
and here: http://post.thestranger.com/seattle/&quo…;">http://bit.ly/6TrV1u

Isn't this the only thing you write about, Dom?

Posted by You're Doing It Wrong on January 20, 2010 at 9:22 AM

@ 1) Good morning. Holmes's office announced the breakdown of these 42 cases--and the backlog of DV and DUI cases--yesterday afternoon.

Posted by Dominic Holden on January 20, 2010 at 9:30 AM

But the police can take these cases to the King County Prosecuting Attorney who can file them in District Court under state law. What Will Satterberg Do?

Posted by Algernon on January 20, 2010 at 10:12 AM

Personally, I'm glad we have a new guy who will give Domestic Violence cases a way higher priority than MJ cases.

Posted by Will in Seattle

on January 20, 2010 at 10:25 AM

@3,

As far as misdemeanors go, the mission of the King County Prosecuting Attorney's office is to handle cases occurring in unincorporated areas of King County.

If Satterberg were to even think about spending county resources going after cases his office isn't funded to pursue in the first place, while the City of Seattle saves its money for other priorities, county taxpayers would and should freak right the fuck out.

Oh, and Dow Constantine probably wouldn't appreciate the idea of spending county money on city pot cases, either.

Posted by Eric Arrr on January 20, 2010 at 10:39 AM

@ 3) As I understand it, the county district court only accepts misdemeanors from unincorporated King County and cities that don't have their own municipal court (and the county's superior court doesn't handle misdemeanors). So this isn't in Satterberg's purview, as far as I can tell.

So the question is: Will Seattle police continue making arrests for pot possession if they know the city attorney won't file charges?

Posted by Dominic Holden on January 20, 2010 at 10:50 AM

@3: Actually, no, the Seattle Police Department cannot refer misdemeanor marijuana cases - whether described as violations of the Seattle Municipal Code or of the Revised Code of Washington - that occur within Seattle city limits to the King County Prosecuting Attorney with the expectation that they will be filed in King County District Court. This is because the King County District Courts adjudicate only misdemeanor cases that occur in unincorporated King County or a jurisdiction within incorporated King County that contracts with the county for district court services. Seattle is not one of those jurisdictions. See, e.g., "Council Approves Plan for the 'District Court of the Future,'" http://your.kingcounty.gov/council/news/….

Alison Holcomb, Drug Policy Director
ACLU of Washington

Posted by Alison on January 20, 2010 at 10:57 AM

Wrong legally. State law grants jurisdiction to district courts over offenses in the county. There may be agreements between SPD, KCS, city Aatorney and prosecuting attorney, but district court has the jurisdiction to hear the cases which the prosecutor can choose to file. In the 1970s, the city had a marijuana tax ordinance: if you didn't have a tax stamp on your dope, you were guilty of a crime. This was struck as obviously unconstitutional. During the period of time before the city adopted a new marijuana ordinance, the police filed misdemeanor marijuana cases in district court. District court has the jurisdiction and cannot choose not to accept a filing. Superior courts have concurrent jurisdiction with the district and municpal courts; prosecutors and city attorneys can choose to file misdemeanor cases in superior court. The King County Prosecuting Attorney does file misdemeanors in superior court. State v. Schene, the fired sheriff's deputy accused of assaulting a teenager in a holding cell, is an assault 4th degree, a misdemeanor, being tried in superior court.

Posted by Algernon on January 20, 2010 at 11:26 AM

@6,

As long as pot possession remains a statutory crime, I have zero doubt that cops will use marijuana arrests as a legal springboard from which to conduct searches incident to arrest and to run warrant checks in the hope of busting people for other crimes.

Posted by Eric Arrr on January 20, 2010 at 11:37 AM

I love living in a police state!

Posted by Will in Seattle

on January 20, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Good point, @9. Marijuana is a crime and police may exploit an arrest to search incident thereto. The law in this area improved over the last year when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Arizona v. Gant: if they arrest and stick you in the patrol car, they can't search your car afterwards unless the arrestee might access the car or if the car contains evidence of the crime you're arrested for. It's really stupid to smoke in the car. Odor = probable cause.

Posted by Algernon on January 20, 2010 at 3:40 PM