Vancouver Criminal Lawyer, Washington, page 7

Sponsored Law Firm

x
Click For More Info:

James Hill
About | Practice Areas
Russell & Hill, PLLC
1212 North Washington St. Suite 132 Spokane, WA 99201» view map
Criminal Defense Law
Professional, Personal, Proven

You have questions, and we have answers. Here at Russell & Hill, PLLC, we know how to obtain the most favorable outcome for your particular circumstances.

800-928-5340
1. James Hill Spokane, WA
  Attorney at Law - WA, 2001
  Seattle University J.D. 2001
2. AboutRussell & Hill, PLLC
  Professional, Personal, Proven
3. Practice AreasExpertise
  Criminal Defense Law
1. Contact
2. Email
3. Refer
4. Blog
5. Visit:
6. Website
7. Profile

Sean Downs

Traffic, State Trial Practice, State Appellate Practice, Criminal, Civil & Human Rights

Status: In Good Standing

CONTACT

500 W 8Th St, Vancouver, WA 98660

Courtney Maureen Baasch

Lawsuit & Dispute, Criminal, Indians & Native Populations, Civil Rights

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 12 Years

CONTACT

Vancouver, WA 98666

Gregory Michael Gonzales

Criminal, DUI-DWI, Misdemeanor, Personal Injury

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 39 Years

CONTACT

Vancouver, WA 98666

Gregory Scott Cheney

Litigation, Traffic, Electronic Commerce, Criminal, Business

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 14 Years

CONTACT

406 W 12Th St, Vancouver, WA 98660

Gregory Michael Gonzales

General Practice

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 42 Years

CONTACT

1200 Franklin St, Vancouver, WA 98660

Gregory Michael Gonzales

General Practice

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 42 Years

CONTACT

1200 Franklin St, Vancouver, WA 98660

Jeffrey Neal Riback

Criminal

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 39 Years

CONTACT

3709 E Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver, WA 98661

George Lincoln Wales Brintnall

Criminal, Federal

Status: Inactive Licensed: 47 Years

CONTACT

8002 Ne Highway 99, Vancouver, WA 98665

Randal Brandt Fritzler

Credit & Debt, Federal, Criminal

Status: Inactive Licensed: 50 Years

CONTACT

Vancouver, WA 98666

Laura L. Mancuso

Estate, Criminal, Family Law, Traffic

Status: In Good Standing Licensed: 27 Years

CONTACT

Vancouver, WA 98666

800-923-0641

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

Call me for fastest results!
800-943-8690

Free Help: Use This Form or Call 800-943-8690

By submitting this lawyer request, I confirm I have read and agree to the Consent to Receive Messages from all messaging and voice technologies including Email, Text, Phone, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy. Information provided is not privileged or confidential.

LEGAL TERMS

SPECIFIC INTENT

An intent to produce the precise consequences of the crime, including the intent to do the physical act that causes the consequences. For example, the crime of ... (more...)

An intent to produce the precise consequences of the crime, including the intent to do the physical act that causes the consequences. For example, the crime of larceny is the taking of the personal property of another with the intent to permanently deprive the other person of the property. A person is not guilty of larceny just because he took someone else's property; it must be proven that he took it with the purpose of keeping it permanently.

HABEAS CORPUS

Latin for 'You have the body.' A prisoner files a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to challenge the authority of the prison or jail warden to continu... (more...)

Latin for 'You have the body.' A prisoner files a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to challenge the authority of the prison or jail warden to continue to hold him. If the judge orders a hearing after reading the writ, the prisoner gets to argue that his confinement is illegal. These writs are frequently filed by convicted prisoners who challenge their conviction on the grounds that the trial attorney failed to prepare the defense and was incompetent. Prisoners sentenced to death also file habeas petitions challenging the constitutionality of the state death penalty law. Habeas writs are different from and do not replace appeals, which are arguments for reversal of a conviction based on claims that the judge conducted the trial improperly. Often, convicted prisoners file both.

JURY NULLIFICATION

A decision by the jury to acquit a defendant who has violated a law that the jury believes is unjust or wrong. Jury nullification has always been an option for ... (more...)

A decision by the jury to acquit a defendant who has violated a law that the jury believes is unjust or wrong. Jury nullification has always been an option for juries in England and the United States, although judges will prevent a defense lawyer from urging the jury to acquit on this basis. Nullification was evident during the Vietnam war (when selective service protesters were acquitted by juries opposed to the war) and currently appears in criminal cases when the jury disagrees with the punishment--for example, in 'three strikes' cases when the jury realizes that conviction of a relatively minor offense will result in lifetime imprisonment.

EXPUNGE

To intentionally destroy, obliterate or strike out records or information in files, computers and other depositories. For example, state law may allow the crimi... (more...)

To intentionally destroy, obliterate or strike out records or information in files, computers and other depositories. For example, state law may allow the criminal records of a juvenile offender to be expunged when he reaches the age of majority, to allow him to begin his adult life with a clean record. Or, a company or government agency may routinely expunge out-of-date records to save storage space.

IMPEACH

(1) To discredit. To impeach a witness' credibility, for example, is to show that the witness is not believable. A witness may be impeached by showing that he h... (more...)

(1) To discredit. To impeach a witness' credibility, for example, is to show that the witness is not believable. A witness may be impeached by showing that he has made statements that are inconsistent with his present testimony, or that he has a reputation for not being a truthful person. (2) The process of charging a public official, such as the President or a federal judge, with a crime or misconduct and removing the official from office.

SELF-DEFENSE

An affirmative defense to a crime. Self-defense is the use of reasonable force to protect oneself from an aggressor. Self-defense shields a person from criminal... (more...)

An affirmative defense to a crime. Self-defense is the use of reasonable force to protect oneself from an aggressor. Self-defense shields a person from criminal liability for the harm inflicted on the aggressor. For example, a robbery victim who takes the robber's weapon and uses it against the robber during a struggle won't be liable for assault and battery since he can show that his action was reasonably necessary to protect himself from imminent harm.

ACCOMPLICE

Someone who helps another person (known as the principal) commit a crime. Unlike an accessory, an accomplice is usually present when the crime is committed. An ... (more...)

Someone who helps another person (known as the principal) commit a crime. Unlike an accessory, an accomplice is usually present when the crime is committed. An accomplice is guilty of the same offense and usually receives the same sentence as the principal. For instance, the driver of the getaway car for a burglary is an accomplice and will be guilty of the burglary even though he may not have entered the building.

EAVESDROPPING

Listening to conversations or observing conduct which is meant to be private, typically by using devices that amplify sound or light, such as stethoscopes or bi... (more...)

Listening to conversations or observing conduct which is meant to be private, typically by using devices that amplify sound or light, such as stethoscopes or binoculars. The term comes from the common law offense of listening to private conversations by crouching under the windows or eaves of a house. Nowadays, eavesdropping includes using electronic equipment to intercept telephone or other wire communications, or radio equipment to intercept broadcast communications. Generally, the term 'eavesdropping' is used when the activity is not legally authorized by a search warrant or court order; and the term 'surveillance' is used when the activity is permitted by law. Compare electronic surveillance.

CONVICTION

A finding by a judge or jury that the defendant is guilty of a crime.

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

State v. Mendoza

... The Court of Appeals in each case held that the sentencing court improperly relied upon the State's assertion of the defendant's criminal history where the defendant did not stipulate to the criminal history and the State did not provide any evidence to establish the prior ...

State v. Momah

... 10 Article I, section 10 provides that "[j]ustice in all cases shall be administered openly." The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and article I, section 22 of the Washington Constitution guarantee a criminal defendant the right to a "public trial by an impartial jury ...

State v. Codiga

... 2 Discovery of additional criminal history, rather than legal error, caused the increased offender score in this case. Codiga's ... form. Â¶ 5 The plea form also lists the prosecuting attorney's statement of Codiga's criminal history. ...

SORT BY:

FILTER BY:

Free Consultation
Male
Female
Suspended

Vancouver Criminal Lawyer, Washington, page 7

Sponsored Law Firm

Russell & Hill, PLLC

SPONSORED LAWYERS

Sean Downs

Courtney Maureen Baasch

Gregory Michael Gonzales

Gregory Scott Cheney

Gregory Michael Gonzales

Gregory Michael Gonzales

Jeffrey Neal Riback

George Lincoln Wales Brintnall

Randal Brandt Fritzler

Laura L. Mancuso

TIPS

LEGAL TERMS

SPECIFIC INTENT

HABEAS CORPUS

JURY NULLIFICATION

EXPUNGE

IMPEACH

SELF-DEFENSE

ACCOMPLICE

EAVESDROPPING

CONVICTION

SAMPLE LEGAL CASES

State v. Mendoza

State v. Momah

State v. Codiga

SORT BY:

FILTER BY:

PRACTICE AREAS 30

NEARBY CITY SUGGESTIONS

Lawyer.com Legal Protection Plan

Premium Membership

Additional Services

Resources

My Account Details