Legal Question for WA courts.

Rubberchrist · June 2010

So, I get to go in for an arraignment on Friday because I misread the ID of a minor during a Sting (I work at a Wine Shop). The court is in Redmond, WA.

My wife and I make "too much" money to get a public defender in King County, but we don't have enough money to properly hire a lawyer, and I was wondering what my capacity to appeal to the courts for leniency on the grounds that my act was borne of carelessness and not willful misconduct.

Some facts:

I am an honor student at UW.

The worst thing on my record is a speeding ticket, and even that was about 9 years ago in another state.

I have been commended officially for limiting the sale of tobacco to minors in the same store.

The sting occurred about 15 minutes to close, when I was by myself in the store, and there were at least 2 other shoppers that I was trying to help.

Basically, I just need to make sure that I can minimize the financial hit I take from this, and that it doesn;t screw up my ability to graduate in March.

Any guidance would be appreciated.

Robman · June 2010

I hate to say talk to a lawyer given the info in your OP, but talk to a lawyer. Your school should provide cheap/discounted legal assistance to you as a student.

Thanatos · June 2010

Getting a lawyer is likely going to be far cheaper than not getting a lawyer.

Rubberchrist · June 2010

Wow, thanks for the quick responses!

So, I figured I would add, in WA the maximum penalty for my infraction is $5000 and (AND) a year in prison. The lawyers rates I have been quoted are $2500 and $1500 with a strong suggestion from both that it would be easy to turn this into a deferral with some community service.

I will, however, call the UW immediately and see if they can help.

Thanks again, guys!

Cauld · June 2010

Will your employer help at all?

RUNN1NGMAN · June 2010

You really need to get a real lawyer. The advice you get here is going to be suspect at best and real lawyers are ethically barred from offering advice on specific issues in states they aren't licensed to practice in.

As far as how sucessful you'd be--in most states ID laws have no intent requirement. It doesn't matter if your misconduct was willful or not. The only question is whether you did or did not sell to someone underage. Given your situation you could probably plead out to something lesser, or maybe have the conviction conditionally suspended or something, but I really doubt you'll be able to go scott free.

In any case, get a lawyer. Look around for pro bono legal services that might be offered at a local law school or something.

Esh · June 2010

Everyone I know that has been hit by stings, no one has served a minor willingly. It's always a mistake or born of carelessness (well, 95% of the time). I don't think a lawyer is going to help you on this. Your best bet is to just apologize profusely and take the hit.

Just point out your spotless record and the commendation. I don't think the fine is all that huge anyway, the first hit on your record here in Portland isn't very chunky at all.

You should be glad you didn't get fired. That's par for course here in Portland by the employer to cover their ass in front of the OLCC (Oregon Liquor Control Commission).

Esh · June 2010

Rubberchrist wrote: »

Wow, thanks for the quick responses!

So, I figured I would add, in WA the maximum penalty for my infraction is $5000 and (AND) a year in prison. The lawyers rates I have been quoted are $2500 and $1500 with a strong suggestion from both that it would be easy to turn this into a deferral with some community service.

I will, however, call the UW immediately and see if they can help.

Thanks again, guys!

You're not going to get hit with an infraction anywhere near that severe. Trust me.

Thanatos · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

Everyone I know that has been hit by stings, no one has served a minor willingly. It's always a mistake or born of carelessness (well, 95% of the time). I don't think a lawyer is going to help you on this. Your best bet is to just apologize profusely and take the hit.

Just point out your spotless record and the commendation. I don't think the fine is all that huge anyway, the first hit on your record here in Portland isn't very chunky at all.

You should be glad you didn't get fired. That's par for course here in Portland by the employer to cover their ass in front of the OLCC (Oregon Liquor Control Commission).

It's a thousand fucking dollars in Oregon.

Esh · June 2010

Thanatos wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

Everyone I know that has been hit by stings, no one has served a minor willingly. It's always a mistake or born of carelessness (well, 95% of the time). I don't think a lawyer is going to help you on this. Your best bet is to just apologize profusely and take the hit.

Just point out your spotless record and the commendation. I don't think the fine is all that huge anyway, the first hit on your record here in Portland isn't very chunky at all.

You should be glad you didn't get fired. That's par for course here in Portland by the employer to cover their ass in front of the OLCC (Oregon Liquor Control Commission).

It's a thousand fucking dollars in Oregon.

Can you link that up? I was sure it's less than that.

EDIT: and OP, you're not going to jail.

bowen · June 2010

Holy shit. Sorry dude. Get a lawyer it'll probably save your ass in the long run.

I mean $1000 may not be much, but, any time in jail is too much time.

Esh · June 2010

Actually, Thanatos is very wrong...

OLCC works hard with grocery store owners to prevent furnishing. We help licensees spot furnishers, and prevent those sales. Furnishing alcohol to a minor is illegal, whether the furnisher is a sibling or a stranger. Penalties for furnishing alcohol to a minor are: first conviction: $350 fine. Second conviction, $1000 fine. Third or subsequent conviction: a fine of $1000 and not less than 30 days of imprisonment (ORS 471.410).

bowen · June 2010

Well that's substantially less shitty.

Darkewolfe · June 2010

Not sure if this contributes to the conversation, but this seems to be a list of recent convictions on furnishing to a minor in WA state.

http://liq.wa.gov/violations/vltn0804.asp

Looks like first-timers tend to get off really light, while repeat offenders are the ones going up.

Edit: Not very recent, from April 2008. Still.

Thanatos · June 2010

Darkewolfe wrote: »

Not sure if this contributes to the conversation, but this seems to be a list of recent convictions on furnishing to a minor in WA state.

http://liq.wa.gov/violations/vltn0804.asp

Looks like first-timers tend to get off really light, while repeat offenders are the ones going up.

Edit: Not very recent, from April 2008. Still.

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

Esh · June 2010

Rubberchrist wrote: »

Wow, thanks for the quick responses!

So, I figured I would add, in WA the maximum penalty for my infraction is $5000 and (AND) a year in prison. The lawyers rates I have been quoted are $2500 and $1500 with a strong suggestion from both that it would be easy to turn this into a deferral with some community service.

I will, however, call the UW immediately and see if they can help.

Thanks again, guys!

Where did you pull that information? I found this...

Clerks who sell alcohol to a minor receive a criminal citation. Liquor licensees receive either an administrative violation notice (AVN) or a written warning from the Liquor Control Board based on past offenses.

The first time AVN penalty for selling alcohol to a minor is a five-day suspension or a $500 fine, a second offense is a 7-day suspension with no monetary option, a third offense is a 30-day suspension with no monetary option, and a fourth offense is a license cancellation.

Darkewolfe · June 2010

Thanatos wrote: »

Darkewolfe wrote: »

Not sure if this contributes to the conversation, but this seems to be a list of recent convictions on furnishing to a minor in WA state.

http://liq.wa.gov/violations/vltn0804.asp

Looks like first-timers tend to get off really light, while repeat offenders are the ones going up.

Edit: Not very recent, from April 2008. Still.

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

It's a misdemeanor, not a felony.

Esh · June 2010

Thanatos wrote: »

Darkewolfe wrote: »

Not sure if this contributes to the conversation, but this seems to be a list of recent convictions on furnishing to a minor in WA state.

http://liq.wa.gov/violations/vltn0804.asp

Looks like first-timers tend to get off really light, while repeat offenders are the ones going up.

Edit: Not very recent, from April 2008. Still.

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

He's not going to get out of it, lawyer or no. He committed the crime plain and simple. It'll be on his record, and yes it'll hurt if he's looking for another job furnishing alcohol, but since his employer is keeping him, he can point that out and any further employment should probably be ok with it.

I personally wouldn't hire someone with a violation, but I'm pretty uptight about that sort of thing and I really like to cover my ass.

adytum · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

Thanatos wrote: »

Darkewolfe wrote: »

Not sure if this contributes to the conversation, but this seems to be a list of recent convictions on furnishing to a minor in WA state.

http://liq.wa.gov/violations/vltn0804.asp

Looks like first-timers tend to get off really light, while repeat offenders are the ones going up.

Edit: Not very recent, from April 2008. Still.

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

He's not going to get out of it, lawyer or no. He committed the crime plain and simple. It'll be on his record, and yes it'll hurt if he's looking for another job furnishing alcohol, but since his employer is keeping him, he can point that out and any further employment should probably be ok with it.

I personally wouldn't hire someone with a violation, but I'm pretty uptight about that sort of thing and I really like to cover my ass.

You can frequently have things dropped from your record if you meet certain conditions of the court.. assuming you have a lawyer who knows the system to advocate for you.

Advising not getting a lawyer and sucking up the conviction in this case (honest mistake, first time, otherwise an upstanding citizen) is just bad advice.

Esh · June 2010

adytum wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

Thanatos wrote: »

Darkewolfe wrote: »

Not sure if this contributes to the conversation, but this seems to be a list of recent convictions on furnishing to a minor in WA state.

http://liq.wa.gov/violations/vltn0804.asp

Looks like first-timers tend to get off really light, while repeat offenders are the ones going up.

Edit: Not very recent, from April 2008. Still.

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

He's not going to get out of it, lawyer or no. He committed the crime plain and simple. It'll be on his record, and yes it'll hurt if he's looking for another job furnishing alcohol, but since his employer is keeping him, he can point that out and any further employment should probably be ok with it.

I personally wouldn't hire someone with a violation, but I'm pretty uptight about that sort of thing and I really like to cover my ass.

You can frequently have things dropped from your record if you meet certain conditions of the court.. assuming you have a lawyer who knows the system to advocate for you.

Advising not getting a lawyer and sucking up the conviction in this case (honest mistake, first time, otherwise an upstanding citizen) is just bad advice.

No, it's not. It's a tiny fine and a misdemeanor which will have little to no bearing on anything he does in the future. Seen it happen many times. Same situation. As far as I know (and I know quite a bit concerning what happens in bars), there isn't a way to get it expunged. You can get fines reduced for the venue by performing certain education classes and installing ID readers, but that's about it.

Thanatos · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

Thanatos wrote: »

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

He's not going to get out of it, lawyer or no. He committed the crime plain and simple. It'll be on his record, and yes it'll hurt if he's looking for another job furnishing alcohol, but since his employer is keeping him, he can point that out and any further employment should probably be ok with it.

I personally wouldn't hire someone with a violation, but I'm pretty uptight about that sort of thing and I really like to cover my ass.

Uh, I didn't say anything about him getting out of it. However, you probably shouldn't talk when you clearly don't know the first thing about the legal system.

It's very possible on a first-time offense that you can get what's called a "deferred prosecution," which means that the crime doesn't go on your record, and as long as you don't commit another crime within some set period of time (usually a year or two), the offense is expunged (it's as if it didn't happen).

So no, it's not going to necessarily be on his record, and it can also hurt for other jobs (anytime you apply at any job which requires a background check, like at a bank, or with a military contractor, or, in the next few years, probably checker at Wal-Mart).

adytum · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

adytum wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

He's not going to get out of it, lawyer or no. He committed the crime plain and simple. It'll be on his record, and yes it'll hurt if he's looking for another job furnishing alcohol, but since his employer is keeping him, he can point that out and any further employment should probably be ok with it.

I personally wouldn't hire someone with a violation, but I'm pretty uptight about that sort of thing and I really like to cover my ass.

You can frequently have things dropped from your record if you meet certain conditions of the court.. assuming you have a lawyer who knows the system to advocate for you.

Advising not getting a lawyer and sucking up the conviction in this case (honest mistake, first time, otherwise an upstanding citizen) is just bad advice.

No, it's not. It's a tiny fine and a misdemeanor which will have little to no bearing on anything he does in the future. Seen it happen many times. Same situation. As far as I know (and I know quite a bit concerning what happens in bars), there isn't a way to get it expunged. You can get fines reduced for the venue by performing certain education classes and installing ID readers, but that's about it.

You just said you wouldn't hire someone in his same situation. So much for no bearing.

There's a real possibility that in this state for this kind of infraction there is no way to have a charge dropped. But in many places for many minor first offenses, a lawyer can work out a deal to have the charges dropped in return for good behavior / community service / etc.

Don't have a lawyer? You're uniformly fucked in all jurisdictions.

Edit- Thanatos beat me to it.

Esh · June 2010

Thanatos wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

Thanatos wrote: »

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

He's not going to get out of it, lawyer or no. He committed the crime plain and simple. It'll be on his record, and yes it'll hurt if he's looking for another job furnishing alcohol, but since his employer is keeping him, he can point that out and any further employment should probably be ok with it.

I personally wouldn't hire someone with a violation, but I'm pretty uptight about that sort of thing and I really like to cover my ass.

Uh, I didn't say anything about him getting out of it. However, you probably shouldn't talk when you clearly don't know the first thing about the legal system.

EDIT: Also, the lawyer said he didn't have money for a lawyer, so giving that advice is just useless.

It's very possible on a first-time offense that you can get what's called a "deferred prosecution," which means that the crime doesn't go on your record, and as long as you don't commit another crime within some set period of time (usually a year or two), the offense is expunged (it's as if it didn't happen).

So no, it's not going to necessarily be on his record, and it can also hurt for other jobs (anytime you apply at any job which requires a background check, like at a bank, or with a military contractor, or, in the next few years, probably checker at Wal-Mart).

Is that like tossing out random amounts for fines? Sorta like not talking then?

I'm not a lawyer, but I have worked in bars and restaurants for over 10 years and seen the results of these actions on several occasions and talked other bartenders about these kinds of things and I've never heard of someone getting it deferred.

And Adytum, reread what I wrote. I said I wouldn't hire someone like that, but if he can show that his employer kept him and that it was an honest mistake, he shouldn't have any issues.

EDIT: Also, the OP said he didn't have money for a lawyer, so that advice isn't relevant.

Thanatos · June 2010

Darkewolfe wrote: »

Thanatos wrote: »

It doesn't tell you whether or not those people have lawyers.

And when I say it's going to cost you less, I don't necessarily mean right now; maybe they would let you off with a relatively small fine and a conviction normally. However, having that on your record could potentially make things a lot more difficult down the line when you're job-hunting or apartment-hunting.

It's a misdemeanor, not a felony.

Which means it won't matter, as long as you aren't applying to work at a bank. Or a military contractor. Or most government jobs. Or, in a few years, probably at Wal-Mart as a checker.

Background checks are getting more and more common, and they will turn up misdemeanors in addition to felonies.

adytum · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

And Adytum, reread what I wrote. I said I wouldn't hire someone like that, but if he can show that his employer kept him and that it was an honest mistake, he shouldn't have any issues.

Yes, I saw what you wrote. You said there would be no repercussions, then contradicted yourself. I have not worked in the restaurant industry, but I can only imagine having a conviction of that sort would bar you from employment at a number of establishments, especially when there are scores of people without criminal records applying for jobs.

And that's not taking into consideration when he tries to get a job outside of the restaurant industry. Any type of conviction can be a giant black mark in certain industries.

Esh · June 2010

adytum wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

And Adytum, reread what I wrote. I said I wouldn't hire someone like that, but if he can show that his employer kept him and that it was an honest mistake, he shouldn't have any issues.

Yes, I saw what you wrote. You said there would be no repercussions, then contradicted yourself. I have not worked in the restaurant industry, but I can only imagine having a conviction of that sort would bar you from employment at a number of establishments, especially when there are scores of people without criminal records applying for jobs.

And that's not taking into consideration when he tries to get a job outside of the restaurant industry. Any type of conviction can be a giant black mark in certain industries.

Well, this is what happens when you commit a crime. There are consequences.

If the OP is genuinely worried, he should call the Washington Liquor Commission and ask them about it or call a lawyer and get a free consultation to see if what Thanatos is suggesting is even possible.

Thanatos · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

adytum wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

And Adytum, reread what I wrote. I said I wouldn't hire someone like that, but if he can show that his employer kept him and that it was an honest mistake, he shouldn't have any issues.

Yes, I saw what you wrote. You said there would be no repercussions, then contradicted yourself. I have not worked in the restaurant industry, but I can only imagine having a conviction of that sort would bar you from employment at a number of establishments, especially when there are scores of people without criminal records applying for jobs.

And that's not taking into consideration when he tries to get a job outside of the restaurant industry. Any type of conviction can be a giant black mark in certain industries.

Well, this is what happens when you commit a crime. There are consequences.

If the OP is genuinely worried, he should call the Washington Liquor Commission and ask them about it or call a lawyer and get a free consultation to see if what Thanatos is suggesting is even possible.

Rubberchrist wrote: »

...with a strong suggestion from both that it would be easy to turn this into a deferral with some community service.

Reading comprehension++

adytum · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

adytum wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

And Adytum, reread what I wrote. I said I wouldn't hire someone like that, but if he can show that his employer kept him and that it was an honest mistake, he shouldn't have any issues.

Yes, I saw what you wrote. You said there would be no repercussions, then contradicted yourself. I have not worked in the restaurant industry, but I can only imagine having a conviction of that sort would bar you from employment at a number of establishments, especially when there are scores of people without criminal records applying for jobs.

And that's not taking into consideration when he tries to get a job outside of the restaurant industry. Any type of conviction can be a giant black mark in certain industries.

Well, this is what happens when you commit a crime. There are consequences.

If the OP is genuinely worried, he should call the Washington Liquor Commission and ask them about it or call a lawyer and get a free consultation to see if what Thanatos is suggesting is even possible.

Most people can see the difference between willfully and intentionally committing a crime, and an otherwise good person making an honest mistake.

That's why we have a court system.

Esh · June 2010

Thanatos wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

adytum wrote: »

Esh wrote: »

And Adytum, reread what I wrote. I said I wouldn't hire someone like that, but if he can show that his employer kept him and that it was an honest mistake, he shouldn't have any issues.

Yes, I saw what you wrote. You said there would be no repercussions, then contradicted yourself. I have not worked in the restaurant industry, but I can only imagine having a conviction of that sort would bar you from employment at a number of establishments, especially when there are scores of people without criminal records applying for jobs.

And that's not taking into consideration when he tries to get a job outside of the restaurant industry. Any type of conviction can be a giant black mark in certain industries.

Well, this is what happens when you commit a crime. There are consequences.

If the OP is genuinely worried, he should call the Washington Liquor Commission and ask them about it or call a lawyer and get a free consultation to see if what Thanatos is suggesting is even possible.

Rubberchrist wrote: »

...with a strong suggestion from both that it would be easy to turn this into a deferral with some community service.

Reading comprehension++

From the same lawyers who also tried to scare him into thinking it might hit him for a year in prison and a $5,000 fine. Excuse me if I don't hold my breath on that one.

He should probably get a second opinion.

Rubberchrist · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

From the same lawyers who also tried to scare him into thinking it might hit him for a year in prison and a $5,000 fine. Excuse me if I don't hold my breath on that one.

He should probably get a second opinion.

That is actually posted as MAXIMUM PENALTY by the State of Washington, and was instructed to me by the officers who issued the citation.

I know that they have no reason to put my ass in jail for a year, and probably wont fine me 5K, but it still stands that they CAN.

The unfortunate thing, is that I am indeed getting my degree in resource management, and hoping to work for the state. I think I kinda do need to get a lawyer. Probably should have started looking for pro-bono guys a week or so ago, but I had no idea that I'd be getting information less than 1 week from my arraignment.

EskimoDave · June 2010

Wait... You're responsible for the fine, not the store? That's BS.

Rubberchrist · June 2010

EskimoDave wrote: »

Wait... You're responsible for the fine, not the store? That's BS.

The store has a fine (which is being waived completely because we are all getting permits we don't need, and changing our policy so we no longer accept vertical licenses for alcohol regardless of the bearer's age).

The max 5k and 1 year is MY punishment. First time for stores is 500 bucks OR 5 days without a liquor license.

Esh · June 2010

EskimoDave wrote: »

Wait... You're responsible for the fine, not the store? That's BS.

He was the one who commited the crime, so yes.

Rubber. Definitely lawyer up if that's the line of work you want to go into. Kinda silly though that you'd need one for that. You'd think they'd just make an option you can take while pleading.

Rubberchrist · June 2010

Esh wrote: »

Rubber. Definitely lawyer up if that's the line of work you want to go into. Kinda silly though that you'd need one for that. You'd think they'd just make an option you can take while pleading.

No crap...

Guilty, Not guilty, and "I'm sorry, this was my first time, please let me do community service".

Regardless, I found a lawyer that I can decimate my savings to afford.. We shall see what happens.

mrt144 · June 2010

I'd mosey on over to the UW law school and see if anyone studying there can help you out.

Thanatos · June 2010

I checked with a friend of mine who's a lawyer, and he said "I hate to tell someone to get a lawyer for something like that, but as the old saying goes, 'the only thing more expensive than hiring a lawyer is not hiring a lawyer.'"

Erandus · June 2010

mrt144 wrote: »

I'd mosey on over to the UW law school and see if anyone studying there can help you out.

He did. They have a backlog and can't even spare time to see him until Friday afternoon... juuust after his court date.

Pheezer · June 2010

So what he should do is look up the procedures for delaying his court date. Saying that he can't get legal advice until past the date, cannot afford a lawyer and does not qualify for legal aid seems like a reasonable excuse to push the date back a couple weeks, no?

I have no idea if this would work or is an option, but hey, google right?

Thanatos · June 2010

Pheezer wrote: »

So what he should do is look up the procedures for delaying his court date. Saying that he can't get legal advice until past the date, cannot afford a lawyer and does not qualify for legal aid seems like a reasonable excuse to push the date back a couple weeks, no?

I have no idea if this would work or is an option, but hey, google right?

Yeah, call the courts and ask. The worst they can do is say "no." Or just show up without a lawyer, say that you can't afford one and have an appointment to see one of the UW ones on Friday. They should be willing to push you back.

Pheezer · June 2010

Like, it's completely and totally inapplicable, but in Manitoba even a complete lay person can walk into court and request either a change of venue, or a delay. You get asked why and if it's not complete horse shit or an absurd request ("I'd like to have this dealt with in six months because I don't feel like dealing with this right now") it's pretty much automatically granted.

It seems like the sort of thing that might be possible elsewhere though. You can usually get a good amount of advice from the people who work at the court house on how to accomplish this if you're polite and ask the right questions.

Rubberchrist · August 2010

So, a follow up post;

I just got my (hopefully) final hearing today. I have been given a "Stipulated Order of Continuance", which means pay the reduced fine, go to a liquor handlers class (which I had already done prior to being ordered to by the court), pay "probationary costs" for a year so they can monitor my record, and finally not have any similar infractions for 12 months.

If I am able to accomplish all of these things, history will be changed as such that I never committed my heinous crimes against humanity. All for the low-low total cost of $1890 (including lawyers' fees).

Considering that just bending over for the courts apparently costs about $500 bucks first time (I spoke with some people who were actually charged), and my actual take-home costs were below 1/2 of maximum penalty, I'll consider this one a win since I have no record.

However, please don't come into my wine shop if you are under age. I will be carding like a mutha-effing fiend.

Penny Arcade

Quick Links

Legal Question for WA courts.

Posts