June 2024

WA Supreme Court: Forcing defendants to appear for hearings from in-court holding cells is unconstitutional

June 26, 2024 – In a unanimous decision, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled in the Luthi case that the Cowlitz County Superior Court’s practice of confining defendants to an ‘in-court holding cell’, without any sort of individualized inquiry, is unconstitutional.

The Luthi case centers around Cowlitz County Superior Court where it is common practice to use a courtroom in the Cowlitz County Jail for short criminal proceedings. Within this courtroom is a small in-court holding cell where defendants such as Cassandra Luthi are kept during such proceedings. The cell is about 5 feet wide, five feet deep and eight feet long, with a mesh window that allowed defendants to speak with their attorneys. A jail guard would be inside the holding cell with the defendant.

Cowlitz County Superior Court often utilizes a courtroom within the Cowlitz County Jail for short criminal proceedings where no jury or witnesses are present. They required criminal defendants to appear for their hearings within this holding cell. The WA Supreme Court has ruled this as unconstitutional because it undermines the presumption of innocence.

In 2021, Luthi pleaded guilty to delivery of heroin within a school zone and was given 36 months of community custody as a mental health sentencing alternative (MHSA). She was taken into custody at Cowlitz County Jail on December 20, 2022 where she was held without bail until her MHSA revocation in February 2023, which took place in the jail’s courtroom. Her defense attorney, who was familiar with the in-court holding cell, filed a motion for Luthi “to appear in court without restraints.” This was not ruled upon before her hearing, so Luthi again objected to the use of the cell, which was orally denied by the judge who opined that the cell was not “at the same level as shackling” and did not “really see any prejudice to Ms. Luthi.”

The Washington State Supreme Court disagreed, reversing and remanding for a new MHSA revocation hearing. “The in-court holding cell undermines the presumption of innocence, interferes with a defendant’s ability to communicate with counsel, and violates the dignity of the defendant and the judicial proceedings,” Justice Mary Yu wrote in the opinion.

For more information about this case, please read “Defendants can’t be forced to appear in court from jail cells, WA Supreme Court rules” by David Gutman of The Seattle Times.

Pierce County burglary conviction reversed due to insufficient evidence

May 17, 2024 – Marshall L. Middlestaedt spent 1 year in prison before being released from custody following the reversal of a second-degree burglary conviction in Pierce County. Middlestaedt was represented by Washington Appellate Project attorney, Matthew Catallo.

In April 2022, Middlestaedt was arrested for second-degree burglary after property owners called the police to report what appeared to be intruders cutting the chain to one of their padlocked gates. At jury trial, witnesses including one of the property owners and one police officer testified that the property could be entered by simply walking through the gaps next to another gate on the property, without needing to open the gate itself. Despite the chain being cut, nothing was taken from the property and no one entered the house on the property. Though Middlestaedt’s defense attorney from the Department of Assigned Counsel suggested for jurors to hear instruction for a lesser offense of trespassing, the court declined and the jury found Middlestaedt guilty of burglary.

Catallo argued on appeal that because the property was not entirely enclosed, only partially fenced, by law the property did not count as a building so Middlestaedt could not have committed a burglary. Pierce County agreed and conceded that the Court of Appeals should reverse and dismiss the burglary conviction. The Court in their May 7, 2024 opinion accepted the State’s concession, reversed the conviction and dismissed the case with prejudice.

When asked how his client responded to the news, Catallo said “elated, and he was very eager to leave when he realized that he was essentially held on an invalid conviction.”

Middlestaedt’s case demonstrates the importance of the appeals process in uncovering errors, even non-malicious mistakes, that lead to wrongful convictions, and remedying them as quickly as possible. “I, frankly, just think no one realized that this was a big issue,” Catallo said. ” It just seems like a mistake. That’s why the process is important. I’m not saying it’s a mistake that can be made lightly, of course, but the process is important so we can uncover errors like this and rectify them.”

For more information about this case, please read “Technicality? Pierce County man’s burglary conviction tossed for insufficient evidence” written by Peter Talbot of The News Tribune.