Stewart MacNichols Harmell Inc PS

Add to Favorites

DUI & DWI Attorneys, Attorneys, Criminal Law Attorneys

Be the first to review!

(253) 859-8840Visit WebsiteMap & Directions655 W Smith St Ste 210Kent, WA 98032 Write a Review

More Info

General Info: see uploaded content
Email: Email Business
Payment method: amex, cash, check, discover, master card, visa
Location: 655 W Smith St Suite 210, Kent, WA 98032 9757 NE Juanita Drive, Suite 120 Kirkland, WA 98034 425-454-9959 or 1-800-547-8639
Neighborhood: Downtown Kent
Other Link: http://www.sbmhlaw.com
Categories: DUI & DWI Attorneys, Attorneys, Criminal Law Attorneys, Domestic Violence Attorneys, Family Law Attorneys, Sex Offense Attorneys

GalleryView all (1)

Gallery Image Number 1

Reviews

Hi there!
Be the first to review!

Click to Rate

Details

Phone: (253) 859-8840

Address: 655 W Smith St Ste 210, Kent, WA 98032

Website: http://www.sbmhlaw.com

People Also Viewed

View similar DUI & DWI Attorneys

Suggest an Edit

Stewart MacNichols Harmell Inc PS

Criminal Defense
Criminal Law directly impacts immigration related issues and for that reason it is crucial to have an attorney who will investigate all possible immigration consequences that a person may face. A criminal conviction can lead to deportation, denial of naturalization, or denial of admission to the United States.
DUI/DWI
As a general rule, if you are convicted of a DUI related offense, even if the charge is reduced to a lesser offense, the court will require that you attend a DUI Victim’s Panel. Your lawyer may even encourage you to attend this Panel even prior to the resolution of your case. Victim Impact Panels are held throughout the state of Washington. Panel speakers are people whose lives have been tragically affected by a DUI related offense. The Panels are generally two to three hours long, and typically consist of three to four speakers who discuss their personal experiences.
Traffic Violations
In March 2013, Seth Chastain represented A.K. at a jury trial on one count of Driving Under the Influence and one count of Reckless Driving in Municipal Court. The witnesses for the prosecution included the arresting officer and a tow truck driver. The breath alcohol level was.01. The defense called the defendant and an additional witness. Seth was able to raise significant doubts as to the accuracy of the arresting officer's sworn testimony that A.K. was driving the vehicle. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty on each charge.
Sex Crimes
In February 2010, Scott Stewart represented D.S. at a jury trial in Superior Court on charges of Attempted Rape and Assault with a Deadly Weapon. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had attempted to rape his girlfriend and that, when he was prevented from doing so by her mother, he broke a drinking glass, creating a "shank" which he then used to stab her mother. Witnesses for the prosecution included three King County Deputy Sheriffs, an Emergency Medical Technician and the alleged victim. The prosecution also introduced photographs of the crime scene and injuries, as well as the broken glass, a 911 recording and the defendant's torn shirt. The only witness for the defense was the defendant himself. The jury returned verdicts of Not Guilty on both the Attempted Rape and Assault with a Deadly Weapon charges, as well as the lesser included charge of Assault in the Fourth Degree.
Robbery
In August 2007, Andrea Beall represented E.M.at a jury trial on a charge of Obstructing a Law Enforcement Officer in Municipal Court. The incident occurred at a Transit Station in Pierce County. The government alleged that E.M. physically interfered with the police investigation of a Robbery. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
Burglary
In December 2010, Kristin Fay represented C.B. at a jury trial on one count of Making and Possessing Burglary Tools in cause number 10L1108. The prosecution alleged that “shaved” keys found in the defendant’s pocket were vehicle prowl tools. The defense argued that the city had not established their case and at the conclusion of the prosecution’s case the judge granted a defense motion and directed a verdict of Not Guilty.
Theft
Misdemeanors
M.W. was convicted following a jury trial of a felony Violation of a No Contact Order and Assault 4 Domestic Violence. Ken Harmell brought a motion for a new trial based upon an error in the jury instructions. The trial judge granted the defense motion as to the No Contact Order. At M.W.'s second trial Ken argued that there had been no Assault in Violation of the No Contact Order. The defendant was convicted only of the lesser included misdemeanor violation of the order, and not the Felony, saving M.W. from serving a prison sentence on these charges.
Drug Crimes
In January 2012, Sara Watson represented T.R. at a jury trial on one count of Possession of Marijuana and one count of Possession of Drug Paraphernalia in Municipal Court. T.R. was accused of having a flake of marijuana found on the floorboard of his vehicle, as well as straws and foil used to inhale narcotics allegedly located in various places of his vehicle. The prosecution’s evidence consisted of the items found in the vehicle, testimony from the investigating officer (a drug recognition expert), and a blood test showing the defendant to have had marijuana in his system. The defense argued that the defendant did not knowingly possess the items found in his vehicle. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty to both charges.
Assault
Murder
Ken Harmell is a partner at Stewart MacNichols Harmell Inc. P.S. and has over 20 years of criminal defense experience. Ken is an experienced trial attorney with over 300 jury trials in his career. He has taken cases to trial inluding charges of murder, third-strike offenses, child rape, and other serious felonies.
Probation Violation
Maxwell L. Boltinghouse is an energetic attorney dedicated to zealous representation and advocacy for clients in need. Maxwell represents clients accused of crimes at all stages of litigation, from bond and pre-trial negotiation, jury trial, probation violation and revocation, to sentencing and reconsideration. He strives throughout the lifespan of his cases to communicate and coordinate with his clients, support staff, and to utilize all other possible resources at his disposal to achieve the best resolution and outcome for his clients.
Shoplifting
Since joining SMH, David has developed a reputation for his willingness to try difficult cases to a jury, from Shoplifting to Murder in the 1st Degree. David also leads the appellate practice of SMH arguing for the rights of his clients to Superior Court, the Court of Appeals and the Washington Supreme Court, including trying to make changes in the law involving the Per Se Marijuana DUI and the First Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech.
Restraining Order
In October 2016, Ken Harmell represented J.P. in municipal court on one count of Assault in the Fourth Degree Domestic Violence. J.P. was accused of assaulting his daughter. The City’ evidence consisted of the testimony of the alleged victim, police officers and video that the alleged victim had taken of the incident on her cell phone. Ken argued that J.P. and his daughter were in a property dispute and that she fabricated the altercation in an attempt to gain an advantage with the courts. Ken introduced the fact that on two prior occasions she had attempted to obtain restraining orders and that both times they were denied. The jury returned a verdict of not Guilty
Prostitution
Sex buyer’s education is also known as John School. There is no uniform name for the class but rather it is used in the legal context to refer to the court mandated class that a person must take if they are convicted of patronizing a prostitute RCW 9A.88.110. It is a class designed to provide education about the negative costs of prostitution.
Hit and Run
In July 2013, Chris Sims represented J.A. at Jury Trial on one count of Hit and Run Unattended in Municipal Court. The prosecution alleged that J.A. has knowingly backed into his neighbor’s car and drove off without notifying the neighbors. The prosecution had video of the incident as well as had the neighbor and investigating officer testify. The Chris was able to successfully argue to the jury using the city’s own video that J.A. had backed out and then in the ordinary course J.A. had pulled away not realizing he had hit the neighbor’s car. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.

Personal Injury
January 2008, Scott Stewart represented T.H. at a jury trial on a Reckless Driving charge in Municipal Court. T.H. was accused of driving his motorcycle at speeds of 100 miles per hour and popping a wheelie, resulting in a major traffic accident. The jury found T.H. Not Guilty. T.H. later retained Scott on a personal injury accident arising out of the same accident. In January 2010, Scott settled the claim on behalf of T.H. for $75,000.00.
Auto Accidents

View All Services

Provided by