A cliché but some days you are the windshield and sometimes you are the bug. Today my client was the windshield as her DUI charge was dismissed with prejudice after an evidentiary hearing.
Last Monday I argued to a judge in King County District Court that my client's right to have a private conversation was denied and that, additionally, due to the police department's policy of "purging" (i.e., destroying) video after 60 days it was impossible for her to have a fair trial because it would be her word about that denial of a private conversation with her attorney prior to submitting to a breath test against that of a Washington State Patrol trooper of 24 years.
After hearing testimony from my client after the Trooper, the judge took the argument under advisement, then issued a written ruling declaring, among other things, that my client's testimony lent credence to her account the trooper could overhear her conversation and that she was unable to ask the attorney the questions she needed to in order to make an informed decision.I will tell you from experience, dismissals of DUIs don't often occur but this was the correct call by the judge.
Regardless of how someone might feel about the result, justice was served because the court essentially put the onus on the State to show the defendant wasn't prejudiced after she testified. This is precisely why I fight the fight folks! I have a very satisfied client today.