Adam Heyman has dedicated the last two decades of his legal career to successfully defending people accused of every type of serious crime as a renowned criminal defense attorney.  From 2017-2024, Adam became the longest consistently serving Class A qualified felony public defender at the prestigious King County Department of Public Defense’s Associated Counsel for the Accused Division in Seattle, Washington, where he excelled in earning acquittals and dismissals in a variety of difficult cases. There, he led multiple trial teams, helped train new attorneys entering criminal defense practice, and advocated to reform caseload standards for public defenders in the State of Washington.

Prior to that, Adam was a pioneering public defender at the historic Legal Aid Society’s Criminal Defense Practice in Brooklyn, New York, from 2005-2017, where he successfully earned not guilty verdicts and dismissals in rape, manslaughter, attempted murder, arson, possession of a weapon, assault, domestic violence, drug sale and drug possession, DUI, robbery and burglary cases.  Based on his successes, he was a Society-wide continuing legal education lecturer, intern supervisor and recruiter for the Legal Aid Society, and co-starred in National Geographic’s two-part documentary series, “Criminal Defense,” about the work of public defenders in New York City in 2011: Watch Adam.

In 2010, Adam took a six-month sabbatical to help co-run a nascent public defender system in Nepal through the International Legal Foundation as a Kathryn Wadia Fellow, where he supervised a staff of Nepali lawyers across three regional offices, reviewing all attorney's work, from arraignment to trial and appeal, and oversaw criminal trials.  He also trained Nepali police and prosecutors, as well as trial, intermediate appellate and Supreme Court judges, on issues relating to the scope and implementation of their new constitution, as well as litigated a nation-wide class action lawsuit to win speedy trial rights for criminal defendants denied access to counsel and due process.  He gave a lecture on this important work at the University of Virginia School of Law: See Adam Speak.

Adam started his career as a corporate lawyer at Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, from 2003-2005, in midtown Manhattan, where he represented corporate clients in transactions involving debt and equity financings, mergers and acquisitions and financial restructurings.  Business Insider did a profile of Adam’s successful switch from corporate law to criminal defense: See Adam on Business Insider.

Adam is a 2003 graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law and a 2000 graduate from Georgetown University, magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. He also attended Oxford University, St. Peter’s College, studying comparative law.

The University of Virginia School of Law, Juris Doctor, May 2003

• Honors:
  • Pro-Bono Commitment Award Winner
• Activities:
  • Litigation Director, Pro-Bono Criminal Assistance Project
  • Senior Religion and Social Justice Teacher, St. Anne’s-Belfield High School

Georgetown University, B.A. in Theology, Minor in Sociology, magna cum laude, May 2000

• Honors:
  • Phi Beta Kappa
  • Rhodes Scholar Semi-Finalist
• Activities:
  • Georgetown University Guest Lecturer, Theology Department
  • Georgetown University Division I Men’s Varsity Soccer Team, Goalkeeper

Oxford University, Visiting Scholar in Classical Legal Systems, St. Peter’s College, 1998-1999

National Criminal Defense College Trial Practice Institute, 2016

Washington

• Dismissal – Hung Jury for Indecent Exposure: client was accused of masturbating in front of a woman in Ballard. After a successful cross examination of the alleged victim, a nurse, the jury hung, 4 in favor of acquittal, 2 in favor of guilt.  The Seattle City Attorney’s Office ultimately dismissed the case with prejudice.  Client was facing 1 year in jail.  Right before trial, client was also charged in a separate case with Contributing to the Dependency of a Child.  I was able to convince the prosecutor to also dismiss this case.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Misdemeanor Domestic Violence No Contact Order: client was accused of violating a domestic violence no contact order after allegedly having contact with the protected party, his father-in-law, in front of his home.  After a successful cross examination of the father-in-law, the jury returned a not guilty verdict in less thirty minutes.  Client was facing 1 year in jail.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Felony Domestic Violence No Contact Order: client was accused of violating a domestic violence no contact order as a felony by visiting his child’s mother, the protected party.  Client was arrested at the scene in front of the protected party’s home.  After a successful cross examination of the police officers, where we argued that the client was entitled to visit the protected party’s home due to a written exception in the no contact order for child care purposes, the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.  Client was facing 5 years in prison.
  
  
• Dismissal – Felony Harassment Domestic Violence: client was accused of harassing his partner and threatening to kill her.  Based on significant investigation and negotiation, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office agreed to dismiss the case.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Rape in the Second Degree Domestic Violence (two counts): after an emotional, month-long trial, client, a father of four with no felony criminal history, collapsed in emotion after the verdict was announced. He was accused of raping his partner while she was drunk and passed out.  We used over 13,000 text messages between the parties to piece together a narrative that showed that the incident the alleged victim said was a rape was consensual. Client was facing 9 to 12 years in prison on Class A indeterminate life sentences.
  
  
• Dismissal – Rape of a Child in the First Degree: client, a young man with no criminal history, faced one count of Rape of a Child in the First Degree for an allegation stemming from his partner’s daughter accusing him of raping her when she was a child. We hired a child suggestibility expert and an identification expert and conducted numerous interviews with the State’s witnesses, highlighting failures in the police’s investigation and the alleged victim’s suspect identification. Throughout the ordeal, the client has maintained his innocence and was tormented by the accusations in this case.   The case was ultimately dismissed.
  
  
• Reduction – Drive-by Shooting and Unlawful Possession of a Firearm in the First Degree to a misdemeanor: client, a young man with a significant juvenile history, was facing a long prison sentence.  Based on our successful investigation and negotiation, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office offered a misdemeanor plea offer.
  
  
• Dismissal – Robbery in the First Degree Domestic Violence, Assault in the Second Degree Domestic Violence, a Deadly Weapon Enhancement and a Pending Murder Charge: client, an older woman, was arrested for allegedly stabbing and robbing a man who eventually died from his wounds.  Client was going to potentially also face a murder charge.  We were able to get the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office to listen to an audio recording on client’s phone that showed that client was actually the victim, and that she acted in self-defense.  Case was ultimately dismissed, and client was immediately released from jail.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree Domestic Violence: client was charged with allegedly punching his step father, causing him to fall to the ground and knocking out one of his teeth.  Due to many prior convictions including multiple domestic violence crimes, client was facing many years in prison.  Client insisted he acted in self-defense.  We convinced the judge to release client pending trial, and ultimately convinced the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office to dismiss the case.
  
  
• Hung Jury – Felony DUI that was Ultimately Dismissed: client was charged with felony DUI that ultimately resulted in a blood alcohol level of a .24, three times the legal limit, after client’s blood was taken at the hospital pursuant to a blood warrant.  Client claimed that he had not been drinking and driving and that he had consumed nearly a full bottle (a fifth) of whiskey within 5 seconds of being stopped by the police in his car.  After a prolonged trial, we were able to hang the jury and the felony DUI charge was ultimately dismissed.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree Domestic Violence (two counts), Assault of a Child in the Third Degree: client, a college student with no criminal record, suffered a mental health crisis and was charged with serious felonies.  After working on extensive mitigation to show that client’s actions were due to his mental health diagnoses, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s office agreed to a deferred dismissal.
  
  
• Dismissal of Assault in the Second Degree Domestic Violence: client was accused of strangling her partner to the point that he felt like he was going to die.  After uncovering a 911 call that lead to a neighbor who indicated that the alleged victim was the aggressor, had threatened client in the past, and was armed at the time of the incident, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office agreed to dismiss the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree Domestic Violence, Felony Harassment Domestic Violence and Assault in the Fourt Degree Domestic Violence: client was accused of getting into a physical altercation with his partner while driving on the freeway, and it was alleged that he hit her in the face, head, arms, chest and ribs, causing cuts, abrasions and bruising, all of which were observed by medical staff at the hospital following the incident.  Client insisted he acted in self-defense.  After being able to point out discrepancies with the alleged victim’s version of events, we were able to convince the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office to dismiss the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – Intimidating a Witness: client was accused of intimidating a witness, his partner, in connection with an allegation of domestic violence.  After independently investigating the case, we allowed the detective assigned to the case to search our client’s phone.  When the detective confirmed that there were no records to substantiate the alleged victim’s claims, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office dismissed the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree Domestic Violence: client was alleged to have strangled his partner.  After hiring an expert forensic pathologist to argue that the claim of strangulation did not line up with the physical evidence in the medical records, the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office agreed to dismiss the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree Domestic Violence and Witness Tampering: client was alleged to have strangled his partner in front of their child, and was also accused of tampering with the alleged victim while in custody on jail calls.  The client had no criminal history, but the alleged victim told the police that there had been prior unreported incidents.  After we set for the case for trial and interviewed both the police and the alleged victim, we were able to highlight significant inconsistencies with the allegations, and the case was ultimately dismissed.
  
  
• Dismissal – Burglary in the First Degree Domestic Violence with the Aggravator of Committing the Crime Within the Sight and Sound of the Minor Children: client was embroiled in a nasty child custody case and the alleged victim accused him of burglarizing her home to gain leverage in Family Court.  After significant investigation and witness interviews, we were able to convince the King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office that the charges must be dismissed.
  
  
• Hung Jury – Two Counts of Rape of a Child in the First Degree: client was accused of raping a child multiple times over many years.  Client insisted that he was innocent, and that the child was actually raped by someone else.  After a two-month long trial, the jury hung and could not come to a unanimous verdict based on our zealous advocacy of client and the use of a child suggestibility expert at trial.  Client faced life in prison and was ultimately given a resolution that took life off the table.
  
  
• Special Sex Offender Sentencing Alternative (SSOSA) – Granted in a Rape in the Second Degree: client was accused of raping his partner’s child and pled guilty to reduced charges prior to my taking on the case. The resolution was not agreed by the parties, and we were successfully able to convince the judge to sentence client to a SSOSA, an important sentencing alternative, based on significant mitigation work and drawing on client’s strong ties to the community.
  
  

New York City

• Not Guilty – Arson in the First Degree (5 counts), Burglary in the First Degree: this trial was the subject of intense media coverage.  The New York Times Sunday Magazine featured the fire on its cover—https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/06/22/nyregion/rookie-new-york-firefighter-faces-first-test.html.  Client was 21 years old with no criminal record and accused of lighting multiple fires in a 5^th floor apartment at the 21 floor Wyckoff Housing Project in Brooklyn, New York.  Inside the apartment five people were sleeping, including four children.  Client was arrested and accused of lighting the fires inside the apartment and turning on the gas stove as he left.  When he was apprehended, after a nearly 16-hour interrogation by the New York Police Department and the New York Fire Marshals, client “confessed” orally, in writing, and ultimately gave a 45-minute videotaped confession.  It was one of the first successful trials in Brooklyn Supreme Court where a false confession expert was used.  Client testified in his own defense.  He was acquitted and freed after facing life in prison.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Attempted Murder in the Second Degree: client was accused of shooting his father-in-law in broad daylight after an altercation ensued.  After waking up from a long coma due to the injuries, the father-in-law ultimately accused client of the shooting.  At trial, we successfully saved client’s life by arguing that client was not the shooter and that someone else did the shooting, and that the father-in-law falsely accused client of the shooting because he did not know who the actual shooter was.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Rape in the First Degree: client, a military veteran with no criminal history, was accused of gunpoint raping his roommate.  After client was brought to the precinct, the police interrogated him for hours, ultimately resulting in a written “confession.”  At trial, we attacked the credibility of the alleged victim, arguing that she had a clear motive to lie and was inconsistent with her testimony.  We also attacked the police for their faulty investigation and their inappropriate treatment of client while interrogating him.  After client testified in his own defense, client was fully acquitted.  He was facing over a decade in prison.
  
  
• Not guilty – Assault in the Second Degree: client was accused of slashing a neighbor in the face with a knife, causing permanent scarring.  After a lengthy trial where client testified in his own defense that he was acting in self-defense, he was found not guilty of all charges.
  
  
• Dismissal – Manslaughter in the First Degree: client was charged with punching a stranger in the street, causing the alleged victim to fall, hitting his head on the pavement and ultimately dying.  After significant litigation about the insufficiency of the charge, we were able to successfully convince a judge that the client was acting in self-defense and that a punch could not evince an intent to cause manslaughter.  The case was ultimately dismissed.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Attempted Assault in the First Degree: client was charged with hitting his boss at a mechanic shop with a tire iron based on a dispute over wages.  After a lengthy trial where the client testified on his own behalf that he was acting in self-defense, client was fully acquitted of all the charges.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Robbery in the First Degree and Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree: client was charged with robbing a patron outside of a nightclub at gunpoint.  After a lengthy trial where the client testified on his own behalf that there was no robbery and that he in fact was the victim and did not have a gun, the jury found client not guilty.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree: client was accused of illegally possession a firearm after a gun was found in a bag inside a taxicab in which the client was riding.  Police pulled the taxicab over after the driver had alerted the police to an emergency based on a rear emergency light that had been engaged.  Based on the lack of scientific evidence, including neither DNA nor fingerprints, client was acquitted at trial.
  
  
• Not Guilty – DUI: client, a taxicab driver, rear ended a mother who was driving with her child on the Williamsburg Bridge.  In the back of client’s car police found two empty bottles of whiskey.  Client’s breath alcohol was a .15.  After a lengthy trial, client was acquitted of all charges after the policed were exposed as lying on the witness stand and failing to do a thorough investigation.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Second Degree: client was accused of being in possession of an illegal firearm after being pulled over by police.  The entire incident was captured on client’s phone, which recorded the encounter.  After exposing the police as having a history of making false arrests in the community, the jury found client not guilty.
  
  
• Dismissal – Identity Theft related charges (60 counts) after Suppression Hearing: client was charged, along with several co-defendants, with running a massive identity theft ring after the Federal Secret Service arrested client in his home and recovered thousands of items of contraband. After a significant suppression hearing where I argued that the Secret Service illegally searched client’s home, the Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge suppressed all of the evidence and the case was dismissed.   The case was the subject of a New York Law Journal article and was published as a notable case: https://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/445112/25915326/1422889966707/Fakoya.pdf?token=Pytnk3Dah1BekWuirubE8DSIxVc%3D
  
  
• Dismissal – Attempted Murder in the Second Degree (multiple counts): client, along with a co-defendant, were accused of shooting into a crowd of people during an outdoor barbeque. Client, a juvenile, was placed into a line-up with fillers that were not of a similar likeness as client, rendering the line-up entirely too suggestive.  At the suppression hearing, the Judge threw out the lineup, and the District Attorney’s Office ultimately had to dismiss the case.  This case was the subject of a New York Law Journal article and was published as a notable case that helped change future cases involving suggestive police identification procedures: https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2009/2009-51669.html

Publications:

Heyman , A. S., Esq., & Dineen, M. A., Esq. (2010). The Practice of the United States: An Overview of the Education, Training, Licensing and Ethical Duties of Legal Practitioners. National Judiciary Academy Law Journal of Nepal, 4(1).

Academic Awards and Activities:

University of Virginia School of Law

• Honors:
  • Pro-Bono Commitment Award Winner
• Activities:
  • Litigation Director, Pro-Bono Criminal Assistance Project
  • Senior Religion and Social Justice Teacher, St. Anne’s-Belfield High School

Georgetown University

• Honors:
  • magna cum laude
  • Phi Beta Kappa
  • Rhodes Scholar Semi-Finalist

Memberships:

• Member of the Advisory Council for Project Aletheia: https://project-aletheia.org/, a collaborative center at John Jay College of Criminal Justice dedicated to improving the science and practice of interrogation.
• Member of the Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (WACDL)
• Member of the Washington Defenders Association (WDA)
• Member of the American Bar Association (ABA)
• Member of the Washington Bar Admitted 2017 (Bar number 52153)
• Member of the New York Bar Admitted 2004 (Registration number 4207569)
• Member of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington.

Linkedin Profile:

• https://www.linkedin.com/in/adam-heyman-6b78a418/

AVVO Profile:

• Adam Stuart HeymanReviewsout of 4 reviews
• https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/98104-wa-adam-heyman-4856508.html

Co-Starred in National Geographic’s Documentary “Criminal Defense":

• 
• https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/new-reality-show-focuses-on-brooklyns-public-defenders
• https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5387260/
• https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2464758/mediaviewer/rm659020801/

Legal Contributor on Law and Crime Television discussing the Kellen Winslow Trial with Brian Buckmire:

Business Insider’s Profile on transition from Corporate Law to Criminal Defense:

• https://www.businessinsider.com/life-as-a-public-defender-after-leaving-big-law-2021-9

Seattle Times quotes related to Public Defense Caseload Reform Advocacy:

• https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/was-public-defender-system-is-breaking-down-communities-reeling/
• https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/washington-bar-approves-much-lower-caseloads-for-public-defenders/

Associated Press article related to Public Defense Caseload Reform Advocacy:

• https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/article286703260.html
• https://www.governing.com/management-and-administration/washington-struggles-with-a-crumbling-public-defender-system

University Virginia School of Law Guest Lecture on work with the International Legal Foundation in Nepal:

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=UxEAxCA0NOs

University of Virginia School of Law Program in Law and Public Service Profile:

• https://uvalawpublicservice.wordpress.com/2016/09/19/adam-heyman/

Fordham Law School Lecture announcement about work with the International Legal Foundation in Nepal:

• https://www.leitnercenter.org/events/1048/

Podcasts:

• “Innocent Until Proven Guilty: Part 1 - The Preparation” with Adam Heyman:
• “Innocent Until Proven Guilty: Part 2 - The Trial” with Adam Heyman:
• “Protect the Constitution: Become a Public Defender” with Adam Heyman: https://www.law.virginia.edu/news/videos-podcasts/protect-constitution-become-public-defender-adam-heyman-03

Notable Suppression Case Wins:

• The People of the State of New York v. Timoteu Fakoya, Enny Akinde, and Kayode Adegoke, Defendants, 25 Misc 3d 1205(A), 2009 NY Slip Op 51976(U) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2009): https://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/445112/25915326/1422889966707/Fakoya.pdf?token=Pytnk3Dah1BekWuirubE8DSIxVc%3D

The People of the State of New York v. Dante Jones 2009 NY Slip Op 51669(U) [24 Misc 3d 1229(A):

• https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2009/2009-51669.html

Michael Schueler has spent the last ten years defending those accused of serious offenses across Washington State and for the last three years, training the new generation of litigious defenders in King County as both a misdemeanor and felony level supervisor.  From 2022 until July 2024, Michael also served as the Deputy Managing Attorney for Associated Counsel for the Accused.  Michael has tried nearly three dozen cases to verdict ranging in severity from misdemeanor assault and driving under the influence, to murder with aggravating factors.  Michael has consistently been at the forefront of litigation, providing briefing for other lawyers to use through the Washington Defender Association. Michael has also worked on systemic issues across Washington including City of Seattle v. Erickson, a case heard at the Washington Supreme Court focusing on racism by prosecutors in jury selection. This case was first time in Washington State history that the Supreme Court reversed a conviction due to a Batson violation. Read More on Michael.

Michael’s work on jury selection issues has led to multiple talks and seminars across Washington to other defense lawyers, judges, and prosecutors.  He has also spoken nationally, providing insight to the judiciary of the state of New Jersey as well as attorneys in California, and New York as they began to adopt similar jury selection rules to Washington. Michael also spoke with the Duke University School of Law’s Inclusive Juries Project about Washington’s system of jury selection, and is a member of the Project's Advisory Network. View Here 

Michael began his career in Cowlitz County, practicing at the Cowlitz County Office of Public Defense from 2014 to 2016, handling misdemeanor defense, juvenile defense (misdemeanor and felony), juvenile status offenses, and adult felonies from crimes ranging from drug possession to murder.  He handled numerous motions to suppress in a variety of cases, which resulted in multiple dismissals of charges, and successfully tried a number of misdemeanor and felony matters.

In 2016 Michael joined the King County Department of Public Defense – Associated Counsel for the Accused Division, one of the leading Public Defense agencies in the country.  He began in the domestic violence misdemeanor unit from 2016 through 2017.  In that time, he never lost a trial, getting not guilty verdicts or dismissals after the commencement of trial in nine straight cases.  Starting in August 2017, Michael joined the Kent felony unit, becoming Class A qualified in January 2018.  He remained active in that unit full time until being promoted to a supervisor role in 2021, though he still kept a number of felony cases including multiple homicide cases.  One case, State v. Glaspy, saw Michael and his co-counsel successfully defend a young man falsely accused of killing his step-son over a nearly four month trial from December 2022 until March 2023.  View Here or Here.  For his work in this trial, Michael was awarded the Anthony Savage Award by the Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, an award recognizing an outstanding trial performance or result achieved by an attorney in practice less than ten years. https://www.wacdl.org/savage-award.

Michael is a 2014 graduate of the Seattle University School of Law, cum laude and was a member of the Seattle Journal of Environmental Law.  He is a 2010 graduate of the University of Washington, with a BA in Political Science and Sociology with honors in Sociology.

Seattle University School of Law, Juris Doctor, May 2014

• Honors:
  • Pro-Bono Pledge Award (250+ hours of pro bono work)
  • CALI Award for Excellence – Criminal Law Externship
  • Public Interest Law Foundation Grant Recipient 2012, 2013
  • Bond Appellate Argument Competitor
  • 1L Mock Trial Semi-Finalist
  • Dean’s List – 2013-2014
• Activities:
  • Seattle Journal of Environmental Law – Content Development Director
  • National Lawyers Guild Student Member
  • Street Law – Cleveland High School
  • Washington State Bar Association Moderate Means Program

University of Washington, B.A. in Political Science and Honors Sociology, June 2010

• Honors:
  • Sociology Honors Program
  • Alpha Kappa Delta Honor Society
• Activities:
  • Poster Presenter – Undergraduate Research Symposium
  • “The Effects of the Greek System on Perception of Underage Drinking” - See More
  • Student Senator – Associated Students of University of Washington

National Criminal Defense Trial Practice Institute, 2019

• State v. Glaspy – Not Guilty Murder in the Second Degree with Aggravating Factors (deliberate cruelty and abuse of trust): Mr. Glaspy was falsely accused of murdering his 2 year old step-son. The state failed to investigate a clear medical cause of death for the child – that he died of pneumonia coupled with multi-system organ failure.  Trial lasted nearly four months and the jury deliberated less than two days before acquitting.  Client was facing a life sentence. There were over 30 witnesses in this case, including multiple doctors, medical examiners, pathologists, radiologists, infectious disease specialists, and numerous police officers and detectives.  The case file included over 20,000 pages of medical records and police reports, as well as voluminous digital media.
  
  
• Not Guilty Due to Insanity – Murder in the First Degree – Domestic Violence with a firearm enhancement: client was accused of shooting and killing his wife. Through years of litigation, and extensive work with experts, the prosecution agreed that client was criminally insane at the time of offense due to delusional ideation.  Client was facing a sentence of 25-35 years.
  
  
• Not Guilty Due to Insanity – Assault in the Second Degree – deadly weapon enhancement: client was accused of stabbing a random person with a knife. After litigation and work with experts, the prosecution agreed client was criminally insane at the time of the offense.
  
  
• Hung Jury resulting in favorable plea – Rape of a Child First Degree (four counts): after a six week trial and successful litigation including exclusion of witnesses, strong cross examination of state’s medical expert, use of defense medical and psychological experts, and stopping the prosecutor from being allowed to amend charges, the jury could not reach a verdict. Client was facing an indeterminate life sentence.  Post trial, negotiated a significantly reduced determinate sentence.
  
  
• Dismissal – Child Molestation in the First Degree (two counts) – highlighted massive inconsistencies in the allegation of the alleged victim which resulted in the prosecutor agreeing to dismiss the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – Rape in the Third Degree – Domestic Violence, Assault in the Second Degree – Domestic Violence (strangulation): client was accused of assaulting and raping his girlfriend. Through investigation and negotiation, had charges dismissed short of trial.
  
  
• Dismissal – Vehicular Assault (recklessness prong): client charged with reckless driving resulting in serious injury to another person in their vehicle. Through investigation was able to prove that client was not the driver of the vehicle (injury to client suggested they were in the passenger seat, not the driver’s seat). Prosecutor dismissed when presented with this evidence.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree (deadly weapon), Felony Harassment: client charged with brandishing a machete at a person and threatening to kill them. Through investigation was able to show that the alleged victim had a history of falsely accusing people.  When presented with this information the prosecutor dismissed the charges short of trial.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree -Domestic Violence (strangulation): client charged with strangling his significant other during an altercation.  Through investigation and successful use of a expert witness, charges were dismissed short of trial.
  
  
• Dismissal – Unlawful Possession of a Firearm in the First Degree: client was unlawfully stopped and detained during the search of a residence. During this, law enforcement discovered a gun that was not lawful to possessed.  Successfully investigated and researched this issue and had the charges dismissed before trial.
  
  
• Dismissal of multiple charges – Unlawful Possession of a Firearm in the First Degree: client charged with a variety of offenses including multiple counts of unlawful possession of a firearm in the first degree.  Filed multiple different suppression motions on a variety of different theories – unlawful inventory search and unlawful use of plain view doctrine, among others, resulting in multiple different firearm charges being outright dismissed as violations of client’s constitutional rights.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree – Domestic Violence (strangulation): after investigation, showed that the alleged victim lied about the assault via use of medical expert evaluation coupled with statements of family who were present at the time of the alleged assault.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Second Degree – Domestic Violence (deadly weapon): after investigation, got the alleged victim to acknowledge they lied about the charges.  Due to this, the prosecutor dismissed the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – No Contact Order Violation (felony): Client was accused of going to a protected party’s home in violation of a court order.  Charges were dismissed short of trial.
  
  
• Dismissal – Assault in the Third Degree (assaulting law enforcement): after lengthy competency proceedings, convinced the prosecutor that the appropriate action was the dismiss the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – Theft of a Motor Vehicle:  Client charged with theft of a motor vehicle.  After investigation, convince state that the charges should be dismissed due to question about if client had actual permission to use the vehicle.
  
  
• Dismissal – Felony Indecent Exposure:  Convinced prosecutor client was not restorable to competency, despite report to the contrary.  Charges dismissed.
  
  
• Dismissal – Possession of a Stolen Vehicle: Convinced prosecutor that dismissal was warranted due to mental health issues of client.  Worked with community resources and partners to convince prosecutor that dismissal best served the interests of the community.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Assault in the Second Degree -Domestic Violence – Third Strike: client facing a life sentence third strike for allegedly breaking his girlfriend’s foot. Investigated thoroughly and used medical experts who were prepared to testify that the injury was more likely than not self-inflicted.  When presented with this information, the prosecutor made a non-strike offer of credit for time served, which client accepted.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Indecent Liberties With Forcible Compulsion: client facing an indeterminate life sentence for allegedly assaulting and raping the alleged victim. Through use of surveillance footage and use of witnesses including juvenile probation officers, showed that the client was misidentified for their cousin.  Due to other charges, which were reduced to misdemeanors, client pleaded to credit for time served and a reduced charge on this case.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Rape in the First Degree – Domestic Violence, Rape in the Second Degree – Domestic Violence: client charged with raping their wife repeatedly, including once at gun point. Client was facing a potential life sentence based on the charges.  Through investigation, negotiation and mitigation, was able to have charges reduced down to low level felonies and a non-prison sentence.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Rape of a Child in the First Degree – Domestic Violence, Rape of a Child in the Second Degree – Domestic Violence, Rape of a Child in the Third Degree – Domestic Violence: client allegedly raped their daughter and then allegedly asked them to change their testimony.  Client was facing a potential life sentence.  After extensive investigation and negotiations the prosecutor agreed to dismiss the child rape charges due to evidentiary issues, and client pleaded to one count of Assault in the Second Degree and Witness Tampering resulting in a sentence of less than a year in jail.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Burglary in the First Degree – Domestic Violence: client was charged with class A felony against their significant other. Through negotiation and investigation was able to get the prosecution to agree to a reduction to a class C felony and credit for time served.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Drive By Shooting: client was a very young person with no criminal history. Despite multiple witnesses stating client shot into their car intending to shoot them, was able to show that client was unusually suggestible to others who put client up to the shooting, and negotiated the case down to a misdemeanor reckless endangerment.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Drive By Shooting: client had minimal criminal history and was driving a car that others shot out of. Charged as an accomplice, I was able to highlight how minimally involved client was and that their knowledge of the shooting was tenuous.  Prosecutor agreed to reduce charge to a misdemeanor.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Assault in the Second Degree (significant injury): client charged with punching a stranger and causing significant facial fractures as a result. Through extensive mitigation and negotiations, had charges reduced to assault in the third degree and convinced the prosecutor to agree to a sentence below the sentencing range (22-29 months) of credit for time served.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Assault in the Second Degree (strangulation) – Domestic Violence: client was charged with strangling their significant other multiple times. After investigation and negotiation, charges were reduced to misdemeanor Assault in the Fourth Degree.
  
  
• Favorable Plea – Assault in the Second Degree (significant bodily injury) – Domestic Violence: client was charged with using a knife to cause lengthy slice wound to significant other. Through investigation and use of expert, was able to show that client was the victim of significant domestic violence and was using “resistance violence” to escape from harm.  In light of this, prosecutor amended the charges to a misdemeanor – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence: client charged with assaulting their significant other. Despite multiple witnesses saying they witnesses an assault, was able to convince jury that the altercation was lawful use of force.  Secured reimbursement for client who lost wages as a result of the charges.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence, Harassment -Domestic Violence: client was charged with assaulting their significant other and threatening to harm them. Jury acquitted based on motivation of alleged victim to lie.
  
  
• Not Guilty – No Contact Order Violation – Domestic Violence: client charged with violating a no contact order. This was witnessed by law enforcement officers.  Despite admitting to knowing there was a no contact order, convinced the jury that the client was genuinely confused if the order was still in effect, thus negating the “knowledge” element of the offense.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence: client charged with slapping significant other. Was able to challenge credibility of law enforcement and alleged victim, and the jury returned a verdict of not guilty.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence: client was charged with beating their partner with a broom and other household items. Highlighted to the jury the odd behavior of the alleged victim coupled with a lack of  corroborative injuries and as a result they acquitted.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence: client was charged with punching their significant other and throwing hot water on them. The alleged victim’s story continually changed and grew until at day of trial they stated for the first time that client had also strangled them and attempted to rape them.  Due to massive credibility issues, the jury acquitted.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence: client was charged with assaulting their brother in a fist fight. Despite brother being injured and client being uninjured, was able to successfully argue that client acted in self-defense.
  
  
• Dismissed at “halftime” – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence: client allegedly assaulted significant other, pulling out a weave and causing injury. At trial, the state was unable to prove that my client was the person who allegedly caused these injuries and the court dismissed the charges at the close of evidence.
  
  
• Dismissed after empaneling a jury – Assault in the Fourth Degree – Domestic Violence: client charged with assaulting their significant other. Based on pretrial litigation, was able to exclude a 911 call that was going to be used to identify client.  Without this evidence, the state could not prove their case and dismissed.
  
  
• Dismissal – Violation of an Anti-Harassment Order: client was charged with making phone calls to the alleged victim in violation of an anti-harassment order. Filed motions to dismiss based on lack of ability to prove that the actions occurred, or were received, in King County, where the crime was charged.  As a result, the case was dismissed.
  
  
• Dismissal – Stalking: client was charged with repeatedly emailing a person against their wishes. Filed a motion to dismiss due to lack of threatening or offensive information found within the emails and as a result, the prosecutor dismissed the charges.
  
  
• Dismissal – Violation Uniformed Controlled Substances Act, Theft in the Third Degree: filed a motion to suppress based upon an unlawful extension of a search incident to arrest. Prosecutor dismissed upon reviewing my motion.
  
  
• Dismissal – Violation Uniformed Controlled Substances Act: filed a motion to suppress based upon unlawful seizing and questioning of client charged with possession of drugs. After the motion was reviewed by the prosecutor, they dismissed.
  
  

• Not Guilty – Assault in the Fourth Degree -Domestic Violence: client was accused of assault their significant other. Due to issues with their credibility and lack of consistent physical evidence, the jury acquitted.
  
  
• Not Guilty – Driving Under the Influence: client was alleged to have been driving while under the influence of alcohol. There was no evidence placing client in the vehicle, and as a result, at the close of evidence, the Court directed a verdict of not guilty.
  
  
• Hung Jury – Driving Under the Influence (third in 7 years, greater than .15 BAC): client was charged with driving a under the influence with a high breath alcohol concentration. Evidence suggested that there may have been a second person in the car that was driving.  Jury could not reach a verdict because of this evidentiary ambiguity.
  
  
• Dismissal – Driving Under the Influence (greater than .15 BAC): client was accused of driving under the influence with a BAC of .19. Client was pulled over for a seatbelt violation and officers proceeded to unlawfully extend the scope of that detention.  After a suppression hearing, the Court suppressed the unlawfully obtained BAC results and dismissed the case.
  
  
• Dismissal – Driving Under the Influence: client was accused of driving under the influence based on being targeted by law enforcement for leaving a bar they believed regularly overserved customers. Through investigation, showed that law enforcement seized client before discovering that there was any reasonable suspicion to do so.  Prosecution dismissed charged upon motion being filed.
  
  

Appeals

• City of Seattle v. Erickson Reversed and Remanded for New Trial - https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/934088.pdf: with co-counsel litigated Batson issue at the Washington State Supreme Court. As a result of this, the state of the law was changed on jury selection, creating a new bright line rule for all future cases.  This ruling helped push through GR 37, a rule seeking to eliminate conscious and unconscious bias in jury selection.  It also resulted in appellate relief for Theodore Rhone, a person whose trial was fraught with racism in jury selection. https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/1012047.pdf
  
  
• Conviction Reversed, charges dismissed: Client was convicted at trial pro-se after their defense lawyer was improperly called as a witness by the prosecution.  With co-counsel argued the appeal at the Kittitas County Superior Court and prevailed, securing a reversal of conviction, and a dismissal of charges due to government misconduct. Read More.

Publications:

• Schueler, Michael A. (2014) "A Sinking Feeling: The Problem of Abandoned Boats in Washington Waterways," Seattle Journal of Environmental Law: Vol. 4 : Iss. 1 , Article 8.
  Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/sjel/vol4/iss1/8

Briefing Hosted by Washington Defender Association:

• https://defensenet.org/?s=Michael+Schueler

Speaking Engagements:

• Object Anyway!
  • 2025 Washington Defender Association Conference
    • April 2025
    • 2025 Defender Conference Resource Page - Washington Defender Association

• Preparing Witnesses and Issues with Expert and Hostile Witnesses
  • Washington State Bar Association 2025 Trial Advocacy Program
    • June 2025

• GR 37 Panel Discussions – A view from the Podium
  • 2023 Superior Court Judge’s Spring Conference
  • 2024 Appellate Spring Conference

• Tackling Bias in Jury Selection: Putting GR 37 to Work
  
  • WDA 2022 Ethics Conference
  • Moderator of panel discussion
  • See More.
    
    
• Better Than Batson: Using new GR 37 in Jury Selection
  
  • King County Department of Public Defense Harmony Conference
    • September 7, 2018
  • Washington Defender Association Annual Conference
    • April 27, 2019
      • See More
  • Kitsap County Bar Association Annual CLE
    • October 12, 2019

Awards:

• Super Lawyers 2025 – Rising Stars (Top 2.5% of all lawyers in Washington either 40 or Younger/Less than ten years in practice)
  
  • Top Rated Seattle, WA Criminal Defense Attorney | Michael Schueler | Super Lawyers

• Anthony Savage Award – Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, 2023
  • https://www.wacdl.org/savage-award

Academic Awards and Activities:

• Seattle University School of Law
  
  • Honors:
    • Pro-Bono Pledge Award (250+ hours of pro bono work)
    • CALI Award for Excellence – Criminal Law Externship
    • Public Interest Law Foundation Grant Recipient 2012, 2013
    • Bond Appellate Argument Competitor
    • 1L Mock Trial Semi-Finalist
    • Dean’s List – 2013-2014
  • Activities:
    • Seattle Journal of Environmental Law – Content Development Director
    • National Lawyers Guild Student Member
    • Street Law – Cleveland High School
    • Washington State Bar Association Moderate Means Program
      
      
• University of Washington
  • Honors:
    • Sociology Honors Program
    • Alpha Kappa Delta Honor Society
  • Activities:
    • Poster Presenter – Undergraduate Research Symposium
    • “The Effects of the Greek System on Perception of Underage Drinking” - See More
    • Student Senator – Associated Students of University of Washington

Memberships:

• Washington State Bar Association Council on Public Defense
• Washington Defender Association Board of Governors
• Duke University School of Law Inclusive Juries Project Advisory Member - https://inclusivejuries.law.duke.edu/about-us/
• Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (WACDL)
  • Case Law Committee Member
  • Brief Bank Working Group
  • Amicus Curiae Member
• Washington Defender Association
• National Lawyers Guild – Seattle Chapter
• Washington State Bar Association – Admitted October 2014 (Number 47840)
• Member of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington

Linkedin Profile:

• https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-schueler-9b40916/

AVVO Profile:

• https://www.avvo.com/attorneys/98104-wa-michael-schueler-4632355.html

Seattle Times Article Addressing Issues with Seattle Municipal Court:

• https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/seattle-defense-lawyers-prosecutors-clash-over-effort-to-disqualify-judge/

WACDL Post on Tony Savage Award:

• https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=378675058137705&set=pb.100079856402071.-2207520000

Media relating to Glaspy Case:

• https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/jury-acquits-renton-man-death-girlfriends-2-year-old-son/7HP2E6KYFVC4ZIIRRIPYYOMN7A/
• https://www.yahoo.com/news/jury-acquits-renton-man-death-152606873.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAIAEkhhi_RWhQQM48Gy88c6HNlhJvUZ3NI5iyEz5rQvSTuo2nlTzQfPNidtmVkQktsisAlXWM6fuJMGAHMBLmDwVIjSxkFtfPOHqnkjwnqgJ1YPQbUVvVEwu72is_Qe4IX5Ovjeir0cXojOFETIyAYEjAJeTF50d_qXnXp9wGwT8
• https://www.kentreporter.com/northwest/jury-acquits-renton-man-in-death-of-2-year-old-boy/
• https://www.rentonreporter.com/news/jury-acquits-renton-man-in-death-of-2-year-old-boy/
• https://kcpublicdefense.com/2023/04/10/a-man-reclaims-his-life-after-five-years-in-jail-and-a-14-week-trial/
• https://kingcounty.gov/en/dept/dpd/about-public-defense/plans-reports/2023-annual#toc-Criminal-Defense

Media Relating to City of Seattle v. Erickson:

• https://issuu.com/seattle_university/docs/2017lawyer2/12
• https://theappeal.org/a-victory-for-racially-inclusive-juries-in-washington-de1768861af0/
• https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/law-justice/when-prosecutors-dismiss-certain-minority-jurors-they-must-say-why-court-rules/
• https://thankyou.kuow.org/stories/it-just-got-tougher-block-jurors-color-washington-state
• https://www.laurashaverlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6034/2017/10/November-2017-Defense.pdf#page=21

Media relating to Appellate Win:

• https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1067&context=spotlight#page=3

Media relating to Public Defense Working Conditions and Standards:

• https://publicola.com/2024/03/13/new-caseload-standards-aim-to-improve-ailing-public-defense-system-but-could-take-a-bite-out-of-county-budget/
• https://www.cascadiadaily.com/2024/sep/25/legal-system-has-split-opinions-on-caseload-cap-that-could-financially-devastate-smaller-counties/
• https://www.knkx.org/news/2021-02-08/king-county-prosecutor-says-case-backlog-due-to-covid-pause-must-be-addressed

Brandon Rain has spent his career dedicated to criminal defense and constitutional litigation, and for over a decade has been providing excellent representation to a broad spectrum of clients in diverse environments. From 2023-2025, Brandon acted as Legal Project Counsel to the Seattle City Attorney offering advice on a wide range of issues regarding government operations and policy. During this time Brandon also authored amicus curiae briefs on behalf of a large coalition of major cities and national associations in the U.S. Supreme Court case Grants Pass v. Johnson. From 2022-2023, Brandon worked in the Constitutional and Complex Litigation unit defending the City and its employees in § 1983 civil rights cases.

Prior to that and beginning as an intern in law school, Brandon operated exclusively in criminal defense and related fields. From 2016-2021, Brandon served as a trial attorney at the King County Department of Public Defense defending clients charged with felonies and misdemeanors, and representing clients detained for potential civil commitment pursuant to the Involuntary Treatment Act (RCW 71.05). From not guilty verdicts to pretrial dismissals, Brandon earned a reputation as a tenacious attorney who knows that successful results come from both within and beyond the courtroom.

Before joining King County, Brandon served as a public defender from 2013-2016 at the Pierce County Department of Assigned Counsel. During these years Brandon cut his teeth winning trials in district and municipal courts, and helping clients walk away from misdemeanor charges ranging from DUI to assault to unlawful transit conduct. Brandon was also asked to brief constitutional issues on a number of serious felony cases, including a novel double jeopardy motion to dismiss the aggravating factor before re-trial in a multiple count capital murder prosecution. Several years later, the Washington supreme court agreed and affirmed the trial court’s order granting the motion.

Brandon began his legal career working for the late Jeffrey Steinborn and earning exceptional results for clients in felony drug prosecutions and civil asset forfeitures. The region’s premiere search-and-seizure lawyer, and a consummate gentleman, Jeff impressed on Brandon the importance of buttressing a strong motions practice with artful diplomacy and unconventional lawyering. In one such case, Brandon was privileged to work with Jeff as part of the team that obtained the extraordinary post-conviction release of a Jamaican citizen halfway through a 30-year federal sentence imposed for possessing marijuana seeds in Texas.

Brandon is a 2012 graduate of the Seattle University School of Law, magna cum laude, and 2008 graduate of the University of Washington. Brandon also attended Stanford University for a summer semester in 2003.

Seattle University School of Law, J.D., magna cum laude (2012)

• Awards and Activities:
  • Deans’s List 2009-2012
  • Presidential Law Scholarship 2009-2012
  • CALI Awards for highest grades in Criminal Law, Medical Liability, and Criminal Procedure Investigative
  • 2012 Regional Champion, National Appellate Advocacy Competition
  • Teaching Assistant for Criminal Law and Civil Procedure

University of Washington, B.S. in Cellular, Molecular & Developmental Biology, Minor in Law, Societies, & Justice, (2008)

• Awards and Activities:
  • Young Epidemiology Scholars scholarship for self-designed high school cancer research project
  • Undergraduate researcher at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
  • Undergraduate researcher at the University of Washington

• Not guilty – felony assault of a police officer: Client was charged with assaulting two police officers during the course of an arrest pursuant to a warrant. The jury agreed that client’s actions were a product of the aggressive tactics used by the police during the incident and returned an acquittal on the felony charges.
  
  
• Halftime dismissal – possession of a stolen vehicle: Client was found in possession of a stolen vehicle. Through pretrial evidentiary motions, the defense limited the testimony of a necessary prosecution witness. After the State rested, the judge agreed that the prosecution had failed to prove corpus delicti and granted the defense motion to dismiss.
  
  
• Not guilty – domestic violence assault of a child: Client was charged with assaulting the children of his new girlfriend. The domestic violence designation was dismissed after pretrial defense motions. Defense investigation revealed strong evidence of parental coaching, the witness testimony at trial strongly supported that theory, and the jury acquitted on all counts.
  
  
• Not guilty – misdemeanor assault and obstructing a law enforcement officer: Client was charged with assaulting a neighbor after punching him, and obstructing a police officer for allegedly failing to comply when they responded a short time later. The jury agreed that client acted in self-defense and behaved lawfully during the incident in light of the unjustifiably aggressive police tactics.
  
  
• Not guilty – sexual exploitation: Client was charged with sexual exploitation (aka patronizing a prostitute) after unfortunately stopping his vehicle on Aurora Avenue to ask an undercover police officer for directions. After a hung jury, the client was acquitted at the second trial and secured his freedom and the impound fees.
  
  
• Dismissal – unlawful possession of a firearm: Client was charged with felony possession of a firearm that was recovered incident to a high-risk vehicle stop. Before trial, the defense filed a motion to suppress arguing there was no lawful basis for the stop initially, and even if there was the tactics used in effectuating the seizure were so intrusive as to vitiate any authority of law. The prosecutor conceded the issue before the suppression hearing and dismissed the charge.
  
  
• Post-conviction reduction – felony DUI: Client was charged with a felony DUI and pled guilty and was sentenced. Almost a year later, newly appointed defense counsel re-opened the case after intervening events appeared to invalidate one of client’s prior convictions. The defense filed extensive constitutional briefing to support a CrR 7.8 motion for relief from judgment, and the felony was reduced nunc pro tunc to a misdemeanor.
  
  
• Reduced – rape of a child in the first degree: Client was charged with two counts of rape of a child in the first degree. Defense investigation revealed serious concerns regarding the veracity of the complaining witnesses statements, along with suspected parental coaching motivated by homophobia. The defense filed motions to exclude child hearsay from trial, and challenging the complaining witness’s competency as a witness. On the day of trial client accepted a plea offer to one count of misdemeanor assault entered through an In re Barr plea with no stipulation to real facts.
  
  
• Dismissal – felony drug possession and DUI: Client was arrested for possession of cocaine and DUI. The State filed charges four months later but failed to send notice to the client’s correct address and took no additional steps to pursue the case. Many years later the client learned of the warrant and sought to quash it. The defense promptly filed a motion to dismiss for the constitutional speedy trial violation and the charges were dismissed before trial.
  
  
• Dismissal – obstructing a law enforcement officer: Client was charged with obstructing a police officer for running away after being ordered to stop. The defense filed a motion to dismiss arguing that the police lacked authority of law to seize client and therefore were not discharging their official duties at the time. The prosecutor conceded the issue and dismissed the charge before trial.
  
  
• Dismissal – vindictive prosecution: Client was charged with misdemeanor assault more than a year after the incident but just weeks after successfully appealing a conviction in a different case. The defense filed a pretrial motion to dismiss based on a vindictive prosecution theory. The prosecutor declined to respond and dismissed the charge on the day of trial.
  
  
• Dismissal – assorted misdemeanor charges: Client was charged with trespass, unlawful transit conduct, obstructing a law enforcement officer, and other misdemeanors. The case evidence strongly supporting the theory that client’s arrest was in retaliation for engaging in constitutionally protected speech. The defense brought a pretrial motion arguing the prosecution violated the First Amendment and all charges were dismissed.
  
  
• Dismissal – false reporting: Client was observed by Seattle police officers drinking what appeared to be an open container of beer of a park bench. Rather than approaching client in a peaceable manner, the officer decided to drive his vehicle across the sidewalk and into a park area to cite client for the civil infraction. Client subsequently provided a false name and was arrested. The charges were dismissed after the defense filed a pretrial motion based on the unlawful police actions leading up to the arrest.
  
  

Publications:

• Brandon Rain and Matthew Sanders, It’s Just a Misdemeanor: A Look at Washington’s Broken Probation Model, NW Lawyer (Nov. 2016)
• de Lang, A., Baas, T., Teal, T., Leijten, L. M., Rain, B., et al. (2007). Functional Genomics Highlights Differential Induction of Antiviral Pathways in the Lungs of SARS-CoV-Infected Macaques. PLOS Pathogens 3(8): e112

Awards:

• International Municipal Lawyers Association, 2025 Distinguished Amicus Service Award
• International Municipal Lawyers Association, 2024 Distinguished Amicus Service Award

Memberships:

• Washington State Bar Association (admitted 2012, WSBA# 45247)
• United States District Court, Eastern District of Washington
• United States District Court, Western District of Washington
• Ninth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
• United States Supreme Court
• Washington Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
• Washington Defender Association

Linkedin Profile:

• https://www.linkedin.com/in/brandon-rain-97040a29/

Thomas "Tom" Baker has devoted his career to understanding the criminal legal system from multiple perspectives – as a police officer, detective, police trainer, academic researcher, and as a criminal defense investigator. From 2021 to 2025, Tom served as a felony-level investigator at the King County Department of Public Defense, Associated Counsel for the Accused Division, where he investigated the most complex felony cases including homicides, sex crimes, domestic violence and police-centric incidents. His unique background as both a former law enforcement officer and academic researcher allows him to identify investigative blind spots that others often overlook.

Prior to joining King County, Tom conducted National Institutes of Health funded research at the University of Missouri-St. Louis, where he investigated police-related civilian fatalities. In addition to this work, Tom also conducted Department of Justice funded research focused on how traumatic life experiences - particularly those related to police violence, war, and socioeconomic instability - form pathways to adverse outcomes and incarceration. Tom's academic work has been published in prestigious journals including The British Journal of Criminology and Academic Forensic Pathology.  Tom has lectured throughout the United States on issues related to police use-of-force.

Before his academic career, Tom served as a police officer and detective in Phoenix, Arizona, investigating serious felonies including homicides, organized crime, and armed robberies. He also taught at the Arizona Law Enforcement Academy, training recruits on police policy and procedures while serving as a defensive tactics instructor for in-service officers. This frontline experience equips Tom with critical insights into police procedure, making him a highly credible expert witness in matters involving use-of-force, police procedure, and criminal investigations. Tom frequently testifies in cases where police procedure, use of force, or crime scene analysis is contested, bringing a level of credibility and expertise that few defense investigators can match.

Tom's ties to Washington go back to his years as an Army Ranger assigned to the 2nd Ranger Battalion at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, where he was a team leader and gunner on an anti-tank weapons team. Following his military service, Tom lived and worked in the People's Republic of China, where he studied Mandarin Chinese and developed cross-cultural communication skills that prove invaluable when interviewing witnesses from diverse backgrounds.

Tom is a graduate of the University of Missouri-St. Louis (M.A. in Criminology and Criminal Justice, Ph.D. ABD) and Arizona State University (B.A. in Political Science), Summa cum laude. He was awarded the prestigious Tillman Scholar Award in 2018, recognizing his exceptional leadership and commitment to service. Tom is an independent contractor who owns his own business, Totus Defense.

University of Missouri-St. Louis, M.A. (ABD Ph.D.) in Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2019

• Honors:
  • Tillman Scholar Award ($50,000 scholarship)
  • Aspen Institute Socrates Scholarship (Aspen, CO)
  • Graduate Research Assistantship

Arizona State University, B.A. in Political Science, 2014

• Honors:
  • Dean's List
  • Summa cum laude

Arizona Law Enforcement Academy, Police Officer Certification, 2005

• Graduated 1st in class

Criminal Defense

• Homicide Charges Dismissed (Self-Defense): Client was facing charges for a homicide caught on surveillance video. While police initially thought our client was the aggressor, Tom's frame-by-frame video analysis revealed subtle "pre-attack indicators" showing the decedent attempting to draw a weapon before our client fired. After presenting this evidence along with academic research on threat recognition patterns, the prosecutor agreed the shooting was justified self-defense and decided not to file a murder charge.
  
  
• Felony Assault Charges Reduced to Misdemeanor: Client faced serious felony assault charges based on a witness identification. Through persistent investigation, I found a key reluctant witness living out-of-state who had initially refused to cooperate. After developing rapport with the witness' family members, I secured their cooperation and eventually obtained testimony that contradicted the state's key witness. This testimony proved crucial in securing a favorable offer for our client.
  
  
• Felony Charges Reduced to Misdemeanor: Client was charged based upon officer's claim they could see him driving through heavily tinted windows. I recreated the conditions with identical lighting and vehicle positioning, producing video evidence demonstrating it was physically impossible for the officer to see what they claimed. I also located and worked with a vehicle tint expert who confirmed our findings.
  
  
• Officer Credibility Challenged: Client faced serious prison time for a case that hinged entirely on an officer's testimony. My background investigation of the officer uncovered prior instances of documented dishonesty that had not been disclosed to the defense. When presented with this Brady violation evidence, the prosecutor dismissed all charges.
  
  
• Vehicle Theft Charges Dismissed: Client was charged with stealing a vehicle based upon a witness identification. Through scene investigation, I identified critical flaws in the witness testimony. I personally visited the witness and convinced them to show me exactly where they were standing when they claimed to see our client. Photo documentation and a detailed declaration proved conclusively that the witness could not have seen what they claimed from that vantage point. Case was dismissed before trial.
  
  
• Kidnapping Charges Reduced: In what appeared to be an "open-and-shut" kidnapping case with video evidence showing the victim being restrained in our client's presence, my investigation revealed our client was largely a bystander rather than an active participant. We convinced a co-defendant to acknowledge our client's limited role, developed evidence showing the alleged victim's history of dishonesty with law enforcement, and uncovered an ongoing investigation in another jurisdiction targeting the alleged victim. When this evidence was presented, the state reduced charges from felony kidnapping to a misdemeanor with no additional jail time.
  
  
• Informant Status Verified: Client claimed he was working as a police informant during alleged drug transactions, but law enforcement denied any relationship. Through strategic public disclosure requests and persistent follow-up, I verified our client's informant status despite initial denials from both prosecution and police. This discovery validated our client's account and resulted in an agreeable plea offer.
  
  
• No Contact Order Violation Acquittal: Client was charged with violating a no-contact order, with police body camera footage showing client at the protected party's residence. Despite this seemingly conclusive evidence, my investigation into the alleged victim's background uncovered a pattern of dishonesty and I secured an audio recording of the alleged victim impersonating a key witness. My testimony at trial about these findings led to a not-guilty verdict.
  
  

Notable Foundational Policing Experience

• Foundational Experience – Unmasking Complex Criminal Networks: As a detective, I participated in a multi-agency task force investigating interconnected homicides involving organized crime. I successfully identified linchpin witnesses by name from minimal leads, leading to the identification of suspect vehicles and the collection of critical forensic evidence. This experience in dismantling complex criminal operations provides an unmatched understanding of how the State builds its most serious cases - knowledge now leveraged to deconstruct prosecutorial theories and expose hidden vulnerabilities for the defense.
  
  
• Foundational Experience – Mastering Digital & Surveillance Investigations: Cracked extensive, multi-jurisdictional serial burglary and financial fraud operations by identifying crime patterns in data, meticulously reviewing voluminous video surveillance to identify suspect vehicles, and coordinating advanced surveillance tactics (GPS tracking, fixed-wing aerial support). This deep expertise in how law enforcement gathers and interprets technological and pattern-based evidence is now critical to challenging digital forensics, surveillance methods, and technologically-driven prosecutions.
  
  
• Foundational Experience – Excelling in Cross-Cultural & Sensitive Witness Engagement: While a patrol officer, I secured a crucial interview from a traumatized, Mandarin-speaking elderly victim in a high-profile home-invasion kidnapping and robbery. Later, at the prosecution's request, I utilized language skills and established rapport to persuade the fearful family to testify. This skill in navigating cultural nuances and building trust with vulnerable individuals is now vital for defense investigations, enabling the elicitation of truthful, often overlooked, information.

Publications:

• DiPietro, S. M., & Baker, T. O. (2023). How to Be A 'Good Man': Tracing War's Imprint Upon the Life Course. The British Journal of Criminology, 63(2), 477-492.
• Prados, M. J., Baker, T., Beck, A. N., et al. (2022). Do sheriff-coroners underreport officer-involved homicides? Academic Forensic Pathology, 12(4), 140-148.
• Slocum, L. A., Green, C., & Baker, T. (2020). Unfamiliar Waters: Expectations vs. Reality for Byrne Criminal Justice Innovation Grant Research Partner in St. Louis. In R. Stokes & C. Gill (Eds.), Innovations in Crime Prevention, Springer.

Academic Awards:

• Tillman Scholar Award ($50,000 scholarship)
• Aspen Institute Socrates Scholarship

Linkedin Profile:

• https://www.linkedin.com/in/thomas-baker-3b470b110

Totus Defense:

• https://www.totusdefense.com/