LET US HEAR FROM YOU!
We welcome letters to the editor on issues presented in the magazine. Email letters to wabarnews@wsba.org. All opinions, statements, and conclusions expressed in letters to the editor represent the views of the respective authors and do not necessarily carry the endorsement of the WSBA, its Board of Governors, or individual members of the Washington Bar. Publication of letters to the editor is not to be deemed an endorsement of the opinions, statements, and conclusions expressed by the author(s).
Rethinking Vacate Eligibility
I was reading an in-depth 2025 article by Moe K. Clark regarding clearing the hundreds of thousands of Blake cases that are eligible to be vacated under the 2021 Washington Supreme Court decision of the same name [State v. Blake was covered in the November 2021 issue of Bar News]. According to the article, of the 626,000 eligible cases, only about 114,000 have been processed. The article goes on to discuss how different Blake cases are processed from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. This discrepancy really bleeds into an even bigger issue—vacating criminal records in general (non-Blake cases).
Our office has handled vacating eligible criminal convictions throughout the state for years and it never ceases to amaze how almost indifferent some courts and prosecutors are to the process (others are really good and receptive). The rules are wildly inconsistent throughout the state; some jurisdictions will not allow attorneys to set hearings for vacates, so you are at the mercy of the prosecutor and court for whenever they decide to review the petition and rule on the issue. In cases where a hearing is denied, if you have any issue with what the court does or does not do with the petition to vacate, well, you’re out of luck because your client isn’t entitled to a hearing, and you are forced to guess what the reasoning behind the denial of the petition was. It makes sense to not require a hearing when an agreed order can be entered ex parte but denying petitioners the ability to access the court when there is a question about the outcome deprives petitioners of due process.
This leads to a second issue, which is the need for a system that allows judges the discretion to vacate or expunge criminal convictions that reach a certain age. It is absurd that a person could vacate an assault 2 that is 10 years old but not a DUI that is 30 years old. We have people come to us all the time seeking to vacate old DUIs (some older than 30 years) and we have to tell them that they are not eligible. They might be eligible if they had committed 10 burglaries in that same time frame but not one DUI. Any individual who has remained out of incarceration, has no pending charges and has had no criminal convictions for 20 years should be presumptively eligible to have that conviction vacated and sealed (with certain exceptions like murder or rape).
With everything we know about marginalized communities and the effects that criminal convictions have on housing, employment, and immigration status, why can’t we be more responsive to this need? As a legal community it is long past the time for action.
Timothy Hall
Yakima
Gender Disparity On Display
A rough (due to obscured portions of image) count of the male/female-appearing images on the [February 2025 Bar News] cover is, respectively, 16 male/5 female.
A similarly rough count of the image on page 30 is, respectively, 55 male/36 female.
Can you justify that disparity?
Imagine how that looks to a young female lawyer or law student aspiring to be a prosecutor.
Imagine how that looks to any female attorney.
Helen Boyer
Tacoma
AI Tutorial Needed
I tried to follow, although with little success, in the March 2025 issue, the article “How to Prepare Information Architecture to Leverage AI Effectively.” I am at a loss to understand much of what was written. For example, on page 34, “2. Information Pathways … Well-designed pathways transfer critical executed contract data to enterprise storage locations, route signature data through authorization verification processes, convey matter updates to matter management systems, and direct status notifications to collaboration tools responsible for coordinating stakeholder action.” And on page 37, “This requires an investment in establishing strong core data elements, maintaining reliable information pathways, and orchestrating the two through operational endpoints.”
Would the authors be willing to rewrite the article with examples of the types of cases for which information architecture is most useful and suggestions of software which could be useful for each of the three stages discussed, thereby helping those of us who have yet to make use of generative AI?
Allan A. Bonney
Spokane
Heed The Call
Jordan Couch nailed it in “Access to Justice: From Crisis to Change,” April/May 2025 Bar News, when he challenged us to “get on board” with new and additional ways to bridge the access-to-justice divide beyond pro bono participation. Taking a systemic look, Couch assesses both the needs and provides practical solutions but challenges us to make it happen.
Having been in the pro bono trenches providing both hands-on service for over two decades, along with prior committee oversight, I will confirm that, “Pro Bono alone can’t solve the access to justice crisis.” As Couch aptly points out (and which Curtis Mayfield and others sang): “The first, and … hardest step is to just get on board.”
The Washington State Bar Association recently set up a new Ambassador Program. Perhaps we can create a role and opportunity for those ambassadors and others interested to:
1) Set up workshops inside venues (community fares like United Way provides, social services offices, courthouses, libraries, schools) where the new products Couch spotlights can be both demonstrated and taught to those looking to help themselves. A very small pilot project to teach folks how to represent themselves pro se throughout actual litigation was spearheaded by the King County Law Library some years ago and took place in local public libraries.
2) Have law firms provide tangible options for clients to bypass lawyers or use them more sparingly. All of us have declined to take cases we didn’t think were economically worthwhile, we didn’t have time for, or that were below the threshold where we get involved. What if those clients were provided for by products similar to those discussed in Couch’s article—ZAF Legal, Washington Wills, or Hello Divorce.
3) Teach workshops for the public at the libraries, community colleges, and community centers on these self-help products and alternatives to lawyers and advertise them so the public is aware.
Sticking with my roll-your-eyes, bad-pun, music analogies, was it Paul Simon who sang “50 ways to leave your Lawyer”? Paul Simon certainly had Couch’s invite to us in mind when he continued in that same song: “Just hop on the bus, Gus.”
Michael B. Goldenkranz
Seattle
Letters to the editor published in Bar News must respond to content presented in the magazine and also comply with Washington General Rule 12.2 and Keller v. State Bar of California, 496 U.S. 1 (1990).* Bar News may limit the number of letters published based on available space in a particular issue and, if many letters are received in response to a specific piece in the magazine, may select letters that provide differing viewpoints to publish. Bar News does not publish anonymous letters or more than one letter from the same contributor per issue. All letters are subject to editing for length, clarity, civility, and grammatical accuracy.
*GR 12.2(c) states that the WSBA is not authorized to “(1) Take positions on issues concerning the politics or social positions of foreign nations; (2) Take positions on political or social issues which do not relate to or affect the practice of law or the administration of justice; or (3) Support or oppose, in an election, candidates for public office.” In Keller v. State Bar of California, the Court ruled that a bar association may not use mandatory member fees to support political or ideological activities that are not reasonably related to the regulation of the legal profession or improving the quality of legal services.