Ryan Witt

Ryan Witt

In the age of Coronavirus and court closures, we can no longer walk in and make payments in person. No one is currently allowed into the District Court’s Office. This page provides all the options for how to make a payment in lieu of walking into the District Court Clerk’s Office.


Option 1: Pay Online


The Kitsap County District Court is using a 3rd party service called NCourt to process payments. This system is simple to use and seems to be working smoothly. A small service fee applies. You need to have your case number ready to use this service. To use NCourts to make a payment, click on the link below and you will be linked to their payment site.


CLICK HERE


Option 2: Pay Over The Phone


Again, Kitsap District is utilizing NCourts to process payments over the phone. A small service fee will apply. You will need your case number handy. Their number is:


(844) 546-9370


Option 3: Pay By Mail


To pay by mail, write a check to “Kitsap County District Court” and put you name and case number in the memo line of the check or money order. Then send the check to:


Kitsap County District Court
Room 106
Port Orchard WA 98366

 

No service fee will be added when you pay by mail.

Getting An Ignition Interlock License While Department Of Licensing Is Physically Closed


Clients are running into a unique hurdle that we never anticipated before the coronavirus. Prior to closures of nonessential offices, we always directed clients to walk into a DOL office and apply in person for the Ignition Interlock License, or IIL. Now numerous clients need the IIL, but DOL offices are closed. Is there are solution? Yes, you can apply through the mail.


Applying For An IIL Through The Mail


Eligibility Requirements (on top of having an arrest / conviction for DUI or similar offense):


•  You must have an unexpired WA drivers license or valid out of state license

•  You must have an ignition interlock installed on your vehicle. The installer will send        proof of installation to DOL. The main interlock installers ARE open

•  You must obtain SR-22 insurance, or high-risk auto insurance

•  You must fill out and mail in the Restricted Driver’s License Application, below


pdfApplication


The Application is simple and asks very basic questions. Once complete, mail the Application to:

 

Restricted Licensing
Department of Licensing
PO Box 3907
Seattle, WA 98124-3907

 

The fee to submit the application is $100. If you do not submit the fee, your application will not be processed.


Once The Application Is Approved

 

The Department of Licensing will mail you your Ignition Interlock License. A temporary IIL will come in the mail quickly, and the permanent IIL will arrive shortly thereafter.


What If I Drive A Work Vehicle?


If you are required to drive with an Ignition Interlock license, you may be able to drive a work vehicle without the device. The requirements are strict, but it may be possible. If you have a question about that, see:


Employer Exemption To The IIL

Questions About IIL?


These are unprecedented times. DOL is suspending licenses, but not opening DOL offices to help people address the suspension. Hopefully this helps the individuals that are caught in limbo. If you have any questions that are beyond what is addressed in this article, don’t make assumptions and call our office.

Whether or not an officer needed to administer Miranda warnings is a complicated box to unpack. Our experience in speaking with clients is that most people believe that the warnings were necessary, and without the warnings, a case may be thrown out.


This is not the case. There are many factors that play into whether or not the warnings are necessary. And if a Court rules that they were necessary but not provided, what is the remedy?

Three Part Test For Miranda

There is a simple three part analysis that we use to determine whether the Miranda warnings are required in any given situation: Are the statements in response to a (1) custodial (2) interrogation (3) by an agent of the State? If the answer to any one of the three questions is no, then the warnings were not necessary. The following is a breakdown of what each term means.

Custodial


Custodial means that the person was by all accounts “in custody.” The individual does not necessarily need to be detained, but the individual must feel as though they are not free to leave. This is a case by case analysis and it depends heavily whether or not the person felt free to leave. If the individual is under 18 years of age, extra caution is used in the analysis tending to favor the juvenile.

Interrogation


Interrogation means questions that are intentionally crafted and asked to elicit a potentially incriminating response. When responses are given in response to an interrogation, the responses must also be voluntary – in other words, they can not be the product of threats or promises that undermine the defendant’s free will. If a confession is beat out of someone with a rubber hose, that confession is inherently unreliable. Voluntariness is determined from a review of the totality of the circumstances.

Agent Of The State


An agent of the state is typically a police officer, but other governmental officers can apply. Therefore, statements made to other civilians do not trigger Miranda warnings. Statements made to a shopkeeper or a school security guard are also not made to agents of the state. In almost all circumstances, the rule only applies if statements are made to a police officer. 

How The Rule Is Applied


If no Miranda warnings were provided and you are curious if statements that you made to law enforcement will be admissible in future court proceedings or a trial, you can ask yourself the three part question: Were the statements in response to a (1) custodial (2) interrogation (3) by an agent of the state?


If the answer to any one of the three parts is yes, then statements potentially can be excluded from future Court proceedings. The process where that happens is called a 3.5 Hearing, which is short for Criminal Rule 3.5. Criminal Rule 3.5 provides:


When an accused’s statement which is subject to constitutional protection is to be offered in evidence the Court shall hold, upon demand, a hearing for the purpose of determining whether the statement is admissible.


At the 3.5 Hearing, the Court determines whether or not the statement can be introduced at trial as evidence. 3.5 hearings happen prior to trial and outside the presence of a jury. If the Court excludes a statement based on the above three part test, the jury should never hear it. Some statements are untimately suppressed, but the case would never be dismissed on this ruling alone. 

Statements NOT Protected By Miranda


Certain statements made to law enforcement do not receive these constitutional protections. Statements that are made voluntarily and not in response to a question receive no protection. For example, when a person is sitting in the back of a police car and just running their mouth, nothing they say will be protected. That person’s statements are not made in response to questions, so the exchange is not an interrogation. Hence, no constitutional protection.


Witt Law Group is a criminal defense law firm based in Kitsap County Washington. If you have a question based on your Miranda warnings, or any other criminal defense question, give one of our lawyers a call. If this topic was of interest to you, CLICK HERE to read similar posts in our Blog.