Before I was helping folks in St. Charles County get a fresh start, I spent about a decade as a criminal defense lawyer in Snohomish County, Washington. Some of those were serious felony cases, from murder trials to assault, sex-offense and vehicular homicide charges, the kind of cases where everything is on the line and every decision matters. Here are a few of them, what made them hard, and what they taught me that I still use for every client who walks into my office today, whether the problem is a felony, a DWI, or a stack of bills.
The Gatekeepers Case: Two First-Degree Murder Trials (2001)
This was my first murder trial, and I can’t imagine a stranger or better way to start a career in criminal defense. It had a religious sect, a self-proclaimed prophet, conspiracy theories, and yes, Jim Morrison costumes. Someday somebody is going to write a book about it.
The State charged the leader of a group called The Gatekeepers, and one of his followers, with first-degree murder in the 1998 shooting death of a former member in Mountlake Terrace. I represented the group’s leader alongside Royce Ferguson, a trial lawyer who taught me more than any law school ever could.
Our defense was insanity. Washington law recognizes what’s called the “deific decree” doctrine: if a person truly believes God commanded an act, a jury can find that he couldn’t tell right from wrong, even if he knew the act was illegal. Proving that meant spending months meeting with my client in jail, nearly every day, working out how, why, and to exactly what extent his delusion controlled him. At trial I handled his direct examination and cross-examined the State’s expert, who said he wasn’t insane.
The first trial ended in a hung jury, 11 to 1, and the judge declared a mistrial. We tried the whole case again a few months later. The second jury convicted. Waiting on a jury of twelve in a first-degree murder case is not for the faint of heart, and I’ve never forgotten what that waiting feels like for the person whose life is on the line.
What it taught me: preparation wins arguments, and knowing your client better than anyone in the courtroom is not optional. I tell the longer story, mentors and all, in My First Trial: Murder.
Coverage in The Herald (Everett): first trial ends in a mistrial · second jury gets the case · the verdict
A Murder Retrial After a Conviction Was Overturned (2006)
Sometimes the most important thing that happens in a criminal case happens after the verdict. In this one, my client had been convicted of second-degree murder in 2003. The Washington Court of Appeals threw that conviction out because the trial judge had told the jury too much about my client’s past convictions. That’s not a technicality. Rules about what a jury hears exist so people are judged on the evidence in front of them, not on their history.
I tried the case the second time it went to trial.
What it taught me: the rules of evidence are your protection, and it pays to have a lawyer who watches for mistakes as they happen, so they’re preserved for appeal if they matter.
Coverage in The Herald: the new trial begins
The Stanwood Shooting: Where Mental Health and the Law Collide (2007–2009)
My client was charged with first-degree assault after a neighbor was shot in the face during a dispute in rural Stanwood. The case ended with a 15-year prison sentence.
This case was a textbook example of the association, or really the disassociation, between our legal system and our mental health system. Mental health played a big role in the facts that led to the charge, and as is too often the norm, the legal system was poorly equipped to deal with it. That’s as true in Missouri today as it was in Washington then.
What it taught me: look at the whole person, not just the police report. The why behind a charge often matters as much as the what.
Coverage in The Herald: the arrest
Two Hung Juries, Then a Dismissal: A Child Molestation Charge (2003–2004)
Few accusations do more damage, faster, than this one. My client was charged with third-degree child molestation after a bitter breakup with the accuser’s mother. We went to trial. The jury hung, leaning 8 to 4 for acquittal. The State tried him again. Same result, 8 to 4 for acquittal, another mistrial. After the second one, the prosecutor dismissed the charge rather than try it a third time.
I told the paper at the time I’d rather have heard twelve people say “not guilty.” I still feel that way. But a dismissal let my client get on with his life, and that was the point.
What it taught me: an accusation alone can wreck a life, and sometimes the best defense is simply refusing to quit.
Coverage in The Herald: the charge is dismissed
When the Accused Can’t Understand the Case: A Vehicular Homicide Charge (2008)
Nobody won this one. A young father was killed in a crash, and his family deserved answers. My client was charged with vehicular homicide. He had also been diagnosed with dementia more than a year before the crash, and by the time the case reached court he was constantly confused and couldn’t follow what was happening.
A psychologist at the state hospital found him incompetent to stand trial, permanently, with no treatment that could restore him. The law doesn’t allow the State to try someone who can’t understand the case or help with his own defense, so the judge dismissed the charge.
What it taught me: competency isn’t a loophole. It’s a basic protection, and spotting it early, and documenting it right, is part of the job.
Coverage in The Herald: the charge is dismissed
Treatment Instead of Just Time: An Identity Theft Case (2007)
My client hopped onto a neighbor’s wireless internet and used a stolen credit card to order about $5,000 in merchandise. Not exactly a criminal mastermind; it all got delivered to her own front door. What was really driving it was a methamphetamine addiction.
Instead of arguing about the obvious, I argued about the why: she stole to feed a habit, she had solid family support, and she was a good candidate for rehabilitation. The judge agreed and used a special drug-treatment sentencing option, a shorter prison term followed by an equal period of treatment, instead of two and a half years straight in prison.
What it taught me: when a case can’t be won on the facts, it can still be won at sentencing. Missouri courts have treatment-based options too, and knowing when to push for them matters.
Coverage in The Herald: the sentencing
Why This Matters If You’re Facing a Charge in Missouri
Most criminal cases never go to trial, and most shouldn’t. But prosecutors make better offers to lawyers they know will try the case if the offer isn’t fair. I’ve sat at counsel table in cases where the stakes were as high as they get, so whether you’re facing a felony charge, a DWI, or a municipal court ticket, your case gets prepared like it’s going in front of a jury.
If you’ve been charged with a crime in St. Charles County or the St. Louis area, contact Markwell Law or call 636-486-1093. Let’s talk about your options.
Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome in any future case. Every case depends on its own facts and law.