I am legally a disabled vulnerable adult. I fully believe that Vinny Samuel is acting knowingly to murder me by denying me my constitutional rights, including time to prepare for trail and getting me convicted of crimes I did not legally commit. Thereby placing me in state custody where I can be executed with the silent death penalty! I am being emotionally and physically abused and tortured By Judge Vini Samuel’s actions!

Below are copies of two motions I filed requesting disability accommodations and showing the constitutional violations that Judge Samuel is engaging in!

I. Notice Of Disabilities

I, Michael Palmer, the defendant, was wrongfully convicted by THE GRAYS HARBOR COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT in 2018 for crimes he did not legally commit and sent to prison. In prison Palmer was abused, tortured, crippled and they attempted to murder him through the knowing denial of prescribed medication, denial of a medical diet and the known denial of requested and needed emergency medical treatment – resulting in three known crippling strokes.

Palmer then had further abuse, torture and direct and knowing attempts on his life by denial of prescribed medication and denial of request emergency medical treatment while under the custody of the Grays Harbor County Sheriff where Palmer was forced to starve himself to stay alive due to denial of medication and medical treatment. Including denial of transport to an ER, denial of prescribed blood pressure medication, denial of nitroglycerin for chest pain and denial of emergency medical treatment while Palmer begged Lt. James Byrd and Deputy Muro for emergency medical treatment for hours as they drove by over a dozen hospitals between Monroe, WA and Montesano, WA. While Palmer had blood pressure as high as 157/135.

Palmer is thereby disabled – mentally and physically.

Palmer is now severely limited in several major life activities and several major bodily functions. These limitations have been recognized and medically verified by the state government as DSHS placed Palmer on Aged, Blind and Disabled (ABD) payments due to BOTH mental and physical disabilities based on medical evaluations!

PALMER HEREBY GIVES NOTICE TO THE COUNTY AND THE COURT THAT THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION (federal government) RECENTLY HAD A DOCTOR EVALUATE PALMER AND GRANTED HIM FULL DISABLED STATUS AND PLACED HIM ON SSI BASED ON ALL OR SOME OF THE LAWS LISTED IN SECTION II. BRIEF PART 1 AND SECTION III. BRIEF PART 2 AND THE DISABILITIES AND LIMITATIONS LISTED IN SECTION V. BRIEF PART 4: SOME DISABILITIES AND DISABILITY LIMITATIONS!!!

Palmer also has a Labor and Industries (L&I) rated disability for a torn rotator cuff that resulted in almost full detachment of Palmer’s subscapularis tendon on the right side.

The disabilities for which Palmer needs and is requesting accommodations include but are not limited to:

Stroke Damage Scarring In My Brain From Three Known Strokes/Vascular Insults resulting in:
1. Cognitive Impairment:
  1. Anomic Aphasia;
  2. Auditory Processing Disorder (APD);
  3. Concentration Difficulty;
2. Neurological Pain (Neuropathies) On My Entire Left Side;
3. Reduction In Hearing Due to Increased Tinnitus;
4. Reduction Of Touch Sensation On My Left Side;
5. Urinary And Fecal Incontinence;
6. Motor Impairment In Strength, Range Of Motion And Function
  1. Ultra-Low Typing Speed
  2. Slow Reading Speed
  3. Ultra-Slow Walking
Emotional Trauma
1. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD);
2. Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD);
3. Depression Due To The PTSD And BPD;
Metabolic Disorder
1. Obesity;
2. Ultra-High Blood Pressure;
3. Coronary Artery Disease And Heart Disease (with an apparent recent and silent heart attack);
4. Diabetes;

Musculoskeletal Damage
1. Degenerative Disk Disease.
  1. Sciatica;
2. Right Shoulder Torn Rotator Cuff With An Almost Detached Subscapularis Tendon;
3. Damaged Left Shoulder;
4. Damaged Right Hand;
5. Right Elbow And Arm Pain;
6. Sciatica;
7. Arthritis In My Hips;
Comorbid, Cumulative, Synergistic And Exacerbation Effects

II. BRIEF PART 1 – DISABILITY ACCOMMODATION LAWS

SSI, DENIAL OF COUNSEL AND DISABILITY RIGHTS – A defendant in Washington state who is denied an attorney while fully disabled and on SSI has strong grounds to request accommodations under both Washington State laws (RCW 49.60 and GR 33) and federal laws (Title II of the ADA). Palmer also includes Title I of the ADA as he is being forced into a working position and must be given accommodations to make that possible!

The court has a legal obligation to provide reasonable accommodations that would allow the disabled pro se defendant equal access to justice.
Washington State law emphasizes equal access to justice for individuals with disabilities. The key legislation is the Washington State Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), RCW 49.60. While this law doesn’t specifically list accommodations for pro se defendants, its broad prohibition against discrimination based on disability mandates that state courts and legal proceedings must be accessible.
It’s a deeply concerning situation when a defendant is denied their right to counsel and forced to navigate the complexities of the legal system pro se, especially while living with a full disability and relying on SSI. Both Washington State and federal laws have provisions to ensure reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities in legal proceedings.
Especially when the denial of council can be significantly attributed to Palmer’s mental disabilities.

ENFORCEMENT – Based on the laws below, Palmer believes that the State of Washington, Grays Harbor County and the Grays Harbor County Superior Court are all legally responsible for providing the accommodations requested to PALMER. And since all of my former attorneys – Moore, Laughlin and Young – have indicated that Judge Samuel is biased against Palmer and will not hear his dismissal motions without prejudice against Palmer. Palmer includes the Washington State Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals. (Jason Moore flat out told Palmer that his dismissal motions would be rejected by the Grays Harbor Superior Court but two of those dismissal motions should succeed in the higher courts. Therefore, Palmer will deliver copies of this notice of disabilities and request for accommodations to:
1. Grays Harbor County
  1. Name: Robert Bouffard or Jenna Amsbury
  2. Phone: (360) 964-1513
  3. Email: robert.bouffard@grayharbor.us
2. Grays Harbor County Court
  1. Court Administrator: Josh Sedy
  2. Phone: (360) 249-5311
  3. Address: 102 W. Broadway Ave, Room 305, Montesano, WA 98563
3. Washington State Supreme Court
  1. ADA Compliance Coordinator: Tyler Williamson
  2. Role: Facility Coordinator/Support Specialist
  3. Address: 415 12th Street SW, Olympia, WA 98504-0929
  4. Phone: (360) 357-2070
  5. Email: tyler.williamson@courts.wa.gov
4. Court of Appeals, Division II (Tacoma)
  1. ADA Compliance Coordinator: Dea Finigan
  2. Role: Deputy Clerk/Administrator
  3. Address: 909 A Street, Suite 200, Tacoma, WA 98402-5115
  4. Phone: (253) 593-2970
WASHINGTON LAW AGAINST DISCRIMINATION (WLAD) – Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), RCW 49.60.040(7), broadly defines “disability” as “a sensory, mental, or physical impairment that: (a) Is medically cognizable or diagnosable; or (b) Exists as a record or history; or (c) Is perceived to exist whether or not it exists in fact.”
1. Johnson v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc., 159 Wn. App. 18, 244 P.3d 438 (2010) – Is a significant case in Washington State law regarding disability discrimination and reasonable accommodation because it clarified that an employee is not required to prove “medical necessity” for a requested accommodation to be considered reasonable under the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD).
2. Taylor v. Burlington N. R.R. Holdings, Inc., 193 Wn.2d 240, 439 P.3d 639 (2019): While this case specifically dealt with obesity, the Washington Supreme Court reiterated the broad interpretation of “impairment” under the WLAD. It emphasized that the WLAD’s definition of “disability” is broader than the ADA’s and does not require an impairment to be caused by a separate physiological disorder. This principle supports the idea that chronic pain itself, if medically recognized, can be an impairment under the WLAD.
CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION – RCW 49.60.030(1)(c) declares that the right to be free from discrimination because of disability is a civil right. This principle extends to access to courts and legal proceedings. Therefore, failure to provide accommodations is a violation of Palmer’s civil rights.
EQUAL PROTECTION – The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, prohibits the government from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. This means that the government cannot make laws that unfairly discriminate against certain groups of people.
1. Article I, Section 12 of the Washington State Constitution states: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens, or corporations.”
  1. Article one, section 12 has been held to provide similar protections to the 14th Amendments Equal protection clause. See O’Day v. King County, 109 Wn.2d 796, 813, 749 P.2d 142 (1988) (“Despite substantial differences in wording, past decisions where counsel have not presented the court with an analysis of the history of our constitution and cases from other states have observed that the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause and the privileges and immunities provision (Const. art. 1, § 12) of the Washington Declaration of Rights provide similar protections.”)
THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) – The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is divided into five titles, each addressing different areas of potential discrimination against individuals with disabilities.
1. Title I: Employment (42 U.S.C. §§ 12111-12117) – Covers: Employment practices of employers with 15 or more employees, including hiring, firing, compensation, job assignments, training, and benefits. It also applies to employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor-management committees.
  1. Accommodation Rights: This title specifically requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations to qualified individuals with disabilities. A reasonable accommodation is any modification or adjustment to a job or work environment that enables an individual with a disability to:
    1. Participate in the job application process.
    2. Perform the essential functions of a job.
    3. Enjoy benefits and privileges of employment equal to those enjoyed by employees without disabilities.
  2. Examples of Reasonable Accommodations: Making existing facilities accessible, job restructuring, modified work schedules, acquiring or modifying equipment, providing qualified readers or interpreters, etc.
2. Title II: Public Services (42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12165) – Covers: Programs, services, and activities of state and local government entities. This includes public transportation, public education, courts, and recreational facilities.
  1. General Anti-Discrimination and Accommodations: Title II prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability and requires public entities to make their services, programs, and activities accessible to individuals with disabilities. This includes providing reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures and ensuring effective communication.
  2. Reasonable Accommodation – While the term “reasonable accommodation” is often associated with employment under Title I, Title II uses the concept of reasonable modifications to ensure equal access. These modifications can be seen as accommodations in the broader sense. For example, providing sign language interpreters at public hearings or offering materials in alternative formats.
  3. 42 U.S.C. § 12132 states that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.”
3. Title III: Public Accommodations and Services Operated by Private Entities (42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189) – Covers: A wide range of privately-owned places that are open to the public, such as restaurants, hotels, retail stores, theaters, doctors’ offices, and private schools.
  1. General Anti-Discrimination and Accommodations: Title III prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in public accommodations. This includes the requirement to provide auxiliary aids and services to ensure effective communication with individuals with disabilities (e.g., providing a menu in Braille) and to make reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures (e.g., allowing a service animal in a “no pets” establishment).
4. 28 C.F.R. Part 35 – The ADA’s implementing regulations (28 C.F.R. Part 35) further detail the requirements for reasonable modifications to policies, practices, or procedures and the provision of auxiliary aids and services to ensure effective communication and equal access.
ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA).
1. Episodic Conditions: The ADAAA and its implementing regulations explicitly state that an impairment that is “episodic or in remission” is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active.
2. Mitigating Measures: The ADAAA also states that the determination of whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity should be made without regard to mitigating measures (like medication). So, even if medication typically controls a person’s blood pressure, if it can still spike to “ultra-high” levels that would be substantially limiting, the condition itself could be considered a disability.
Mitigating Measures
1. ADAAA – The ADAAA also states that the determination of whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity should be made without regard to mitigating measures (like medication).
2. Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) – RCW 49.60.040(7)(b) state “”A disability exists whether it is temporary or permanent, common or uncommon, mitigated or unmitigated, or whether or not it limits the ability to work generally or work at a particular job or whether or not it limits any other activity within the scope of this chapter.”
GR 33
1. Washington State Supreme Court General Rule (GR) 33 specifically addresses accommodations for persons with disabilities in court proceedings.
2. GR 33(a)(1) allows a court to “take any action that is necessary to ensure a person with a disability has the fullest possible access to and participation in the proceedings.”
  1. (a) Definitions.

(1) “Accommodation” means measures to make each court service, program, or activity, when viewed in its entirety, readily accessible to and usable by a person with a disability, and may include but is not limited to:

(A) making reasonable modifications in policies, practices, and procedures;

(B) furnishing, at no charge, auxiliary aids and services, including but not limited to equipment, devices, materials in alternative formats, qualified interpreters, or readers; and

(C) as to otherwise unrepresented parties to the proceedings, representation by counsel, as appropriate or necessary to making each service, program, or activity, when viewed in its entirety, readily accessible to and usable by a person with a disability.

GR 33(b)(1) requires courts to consider requests for reasonable accommodation.
GR 33(c)(1) defines reasonable accommodation broadly to include “any modification to policies, practices, or procedures; the provision of auxiliary aids and services; or other measures appropriate to ensure equal access.”

42 USC 12102: Definition of disability –
1. Disability – The term “disability” means, with respect to an individual –
  1. a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual;
  2. a record of such an impairment; or
  3. being regarded as having such an impairment
2. Major life activities – In general for purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working.
3. Major bodily functions For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive function
VA 38 C.F.R. Part 4 (Schedule for Rating Disabilities)
1. VA regulations under rate various disabilities under 38 C.F.R. Part 4 (Schedule for Rating Disabilities).
2. While Palmer is not a veteran the fact that the VA rates his conditions as disabilities supports that they are disabilities and deserve accommodations. Palmer believes that this is especially true for PTSD and the BPD and depression that developed because of the PTSD.
Federal Case Law
1. Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corp., 526 U.S. 795 (1999): Acknowledges the inherent complexities of disability definitions, supporting that an individual claiming disability for purposes of Social Security benefits is not automatically estopped from asserting that they are “qualified” under the Americans with Disabilities Act. This case supports that various impairments, including those impacting cognitive function, physical mobility, and mental health, can render an individual disabled.
2. Bowen v. Yuckert, 482 U.S. 137 (1987): Affirms the validity of the five-step sequential evaluation process for determining disability under the Social Security Act, where the severity of all medically determinable impairments, including those listed, is assessed to determine a claimant’s ability to engage in substantial gainful activity.
3. Heckler v. Campbell, 461 U.S. 458 (1983): Upholds the use of medical-vocational guidelines (“Grids”) by the SSA, which incorporate age, education, and work experience, along with the claimant’s residual functional capacity, including limitations from stroke residuals, chronic pain, mental health conditions, and musculoskeletal issues, to determine if other work exists.
4. Stefl v. Principi, 21 Vet. App. 433 (2007): Reaffirms the VA’s duty to consider the overall functional impact of a veteran’s service-connected disabilities, including how the combination of physical, neurological, and mental health conditions affects earning capacity, consistent with 38 C.F.R. § 4.1.
5. EEOC v. UPS Supply Chain Solutions (9th Cir. 2010) Wherein the Ninth Circuit underscored that accommodations must be not only reasonable but also effective.
6. US v. Farias, 618 F.3d 1049, 1054 (2010). A criminal defendant does not simply have the right to represent himself, but rather has the right to represent himself meaningfully. Without the requested accommodations Palmer can’t meaningfully represent himself especially in challenging and objecting to court finding and rulings!
Washington State Case Law
1. Pulcino v. Federal Express Corp., 141 Wn.2d 629, 9 P.3d 787 (2000): While a reasonable accommodation case, it discusses the standard for a “disability” under the WLAD requiring an impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. The range of impairments, including stroke residuals, cognitive deficits, chronic pain, PTSD, and musculoskeletal damage, would generally meet this threshold.
2. McClarty v. Totem Electric, 157 Wn.2d 214, 137 P.3d 10 (2006): Although this case’s definition of disability was later superseded by a legislative amendment to RCW 49.60.040(7), it illustrates the historical judicial analysis of impairments impacting major life activities. The current, broader statutory definition ensures that conditions like brain scarring, APD, BPD, heart disease, diabetes, and multiple orthopedic injuries are recognized as disabilities under state law.
3. Humphrey v. Dep’t of Corrections, 190 Wn.2d 476, 416 P.3d 1175 (2018): Reinforces the broad interpretation of “disability” under the WLAD and the focus on the employer’s perception of impairment and the duty to accommodate. This is relevant for conditions such as PTSD, BPD, depression, and chronic pain, which may not be immediately visible but significantly impact an individual’s ability to perform job duties.

III. BRIEF PART 2 – PALMER ALSO CLAIMS ACCOMMODATIONS UNDER ADA TITLE I: Employment (42 U.S.C. §§ 12111-12117) DISABILITY LAWS –

The Grays Harbor court assigned Palmer lying and unethical counsel including: Christopher Baum, David Moustachkin, Jason Moore, Luke Laughlin and Karrie Young. Their lies violated of the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC 1.4: Communication; RPC 4.1: Truthfulness in Statements to Others; RPC 8.4 ( c ): Misconduct) and counsels ethical duty to Palmer, their client (In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Dann, 960 P. 2d 416, 419, 136 Wash.2d 67 (1998) “Simply put, the question is whether the attorney lied. No ethical duty could be plainer.”) Counsel’s lies triggered Palmer’s PTSD and BPD. Legally they abused Palmer because of his disabilities an discriminated against him because of his faith. Due to PTSD and BPD lying counsel became not allies and advocates; but enemies who cannot be trusted!
This court then removed Palmer’s right to an attorney in a hearing where Palmer was denied the full right to be heard in violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct:
1. CJC 2.2 – Impartiality and Fairness: which requires judges to “perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.”
  1. Comment [4] to Rule 2.2: “A judge’s obligation under Rule 2.2 to remain fair and impartial and to uphold and apply the law does not preclude the judge from making reasonable accommodations to ensure an unrepresented litigant’s right to be heard, ….”
2. CJC 2.6 – Ensuring the Right to Be Heard: which states, “A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person’s lawyer, the right to be heard according to law.”
  1. Comment [2] to Rule 2.6: “The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive rights of litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the right to be heard are observed. The judge’s obligation to make reasonable procedural accommodations for unrepresented litigants does not change the facts, the law, or the burden of proof, nor does it ensure a victory for the unrepresented. Such accommodations simply mean that both sides will have a fair opportunity to tell their stories.” (Palmer notes that he asked Judge Samuel to withdraw from his case and she refused! Based on her actions against Palmer most especially the denial of the perception of innocence which affected his PTSD and his BPD means she has also discriminated against Palmer!)
The withdrawal of counsel and denial of counsel has specifically mandated that Palmer “work” as his own defense attorney (Pro Se) to prepare his own defense, despite being fully disabled and unable to work full time per DSHS and SSI. Palmer believes that since he is being forced to “work as an attorney for himself”; he is entitled to disability accommodations under both Title I and Title II of the ADA that allow him to fully access the court and the ability to do that defense preparation work!
The court, by denying counsel, has effectively imposed an employment-like role upon Palmer; we must then consider the logical and equitable extensions of that premise, particularly concerning the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The ADA, specifically Title I, prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in employment. While the defendant is not a traditional employee of or officer of the court, the court has, by its own action, compelled the defendant to undertake professional legal work responsibilities. This is a unique, de facto employment relationship created by judicial mandate. When the court forces a defendant into this role, it cannot then disregard the very protections afforded to individuals performing professional functions, especially when those individuals have disabilities.
If a defendant, forced into this pro se position, has a disability that impacts their ability to perform the essential functions of self-representation, the court has a corresponding obligation under Title I of the ADA ( And Washington disability laws) to consider and provide reasonable accommodations to make that work possible. To argue otherwise would be to create a paradoxical situation: the court compels a disabled individual to perform a complex, demanding role without the support or accommodations that would be legally mandated in any other employment context.
Consider the “essential functions” of acting as one’s own attorney:
1. Understanding complex legal terminology and procedures.
2. Organizing and presenting evidence.
3. Communicating effectively with the court and opposing counsel.
4. Meeting deadlines and responding to motions.
5. Maintaining composure and focus during adversarial proceedings.
If a defendant has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of these “major life activities” – such as concentrating, learning, speaking, or thinking – and this impairment directly impacts their ability to perform the essential functions of self-representation, then they should be treated as a “qualified individual with a disability” in this compelled “employment” context.
To deny reasonable accommodations in such a scenario would be a form of discrimination, effectively disadvantaging the defendant solely on the basis of their disability in a role the court has compelled them to occupy. This is precisely what Title I of the ADA seeks to prevent.
In this situation where Palmer is denied counsel and forced to proceed pro se, and can demonstrate a qualifying disability that impacts his ability to perform the judicially-imposed duties of self-representation, the court must recognize its obligation under Title I of the ADA. This would necessitate an interactive process to determine and implement reasonable accommodation and the profound impact it has on the defendant’s ability to fulfill the “job” of self-representation.
Palmer notes that the court and its officers have already recognized Mental impairment in that both Judge Edwards and former Council Moore and Laughlin filed to have Palmer assessed for competency. Palmer has no issues with competency he does however get triggered when the court and/or its officers lie, violate his constitutional rights and behave unethically which unfortunately he has run into too many times in this case!
To deny Title I protections would be to deny justice to a defendant who has been placed in an impossible position by the court’s actions, and to undermine the very spirit of the ADA.
Palmer also believes that denial of Title I protections violates several federal and state constitutional laws such as: equal protection under the law, meaningful self representation, the right of freedom of speech and the right to petition. U.S. Const. Amends. 1, 6, 14; WA Const. Amends. 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 22.

IV. BRIEF PART 3: REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS BUDGET STANDARDS

Grays Harbor County 2025 budget:
1. The General Fund budget totals $51,051,500.
  1. Court fines, fees, and criminal justice funding account for 12% ($4.8 million)
2. Budgets for the Miscellaneous Funds total $89,380,020
3. 2025 Total Budget $140,431,520
Scale of the $140,431,520 Grays Harbor County 2025 budget to $30,000 of accommodations is approximately 0.021% (.00021) of the total projected budget spending. This is a very small percentage of the total budget.
Public Entity Standard: County governments are public entities and are generally held to a higher standard regarding undue hardship denial of accommodations than small private businesses. Courts and the DOJ expect public entities to have significant resources and a broader public duty to provide access and accommodate.
The financial burden on the county from an expenditure of $30,000 for Palmer’s accommodations would be minuscule in comparison to a $140+ million budget. Grays Harbor County would be unable to demonstrate “significant difficulty or expense” for such an amount as a reasonable accommodation to enable Palmer with his disabilities to perform essential job functions for meaningful self-representation and the requirements of following the rules, with accommodations, like a lawyer has to.
When considering the factors:
1. Net Cost: $30,000 is a relatively small net cost for a county with a multi-million dollar budget, even with a deficit. The deficit indicates financial strain, but it doesn’t automatically mean any expenditure, no matter how small, is an undue hardship. The county is still operating and spending over one hundred million dollars.
2. Overall Financial Resources: Grays Harbor County, despite its deficit, has substantial overall financial resources compared to, for example, a local non-profit or a small business.
3. Impact on Operations: A $30,000 expenditure is highly unlikely to fundamentally alter the nature of Grays Harbor County’s services, disrupt its operations, or cause significant administrative difficulty.
4. Kumar v. Gate Gourmet, Inc., 180 Wn.2d 481, 325 P.3d 193 (2014): While this case is primarily about religious accommodation under the WLAD, the Washington Supreme Court explicitly adopted the federal Title VII (employment discrimination, often cross-referenced with ADA Title I) “undue hardship” analysis from Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison, 432 U.S. 63 (1977). This means the same factors (including the size and resources of the employer) are considered.

V. BRIEF PART 4: SOME DISABILITIES AND DISABILITY LIMITATIONS – This notice is to inform the Superior Court of Grays Harbor, the Sheriff of Grays Harbor, the County of Grays Harbor, et al that Palmer has the disabilities and limitations listed in this section which substantially limits one or more major life activities and significantly affect his ability to prepare his defense. He therefore, requests the initial disability accommodations listed herein.

Disabilities Related To Stroke Damage Scarring In My Brain From Three Known Strokes/Vascular Insults:Three strokes resulting in significant long-term damage:
1. Two ischemic strokes and one hemorrhagic stroke that we know of (DOC prescribed hydralazine and clonidine as needed for BP above 170 and then refused Palmer a way to test BP at night so Palmer was unable to take my prescribed medication. His blood pressure climbed and he stroked out.)
  1. Three other times with stroke symptoms but the DOC refused to send Palmer to ER with an MRI so we don’t know if other strokes happened. (The Grays Harbor County Sheriff’s office also refused to get Palmer to an ER with an MRI so it is unknown if other strokes happened.
  2. Hemorrhagic stroke resulted in damage to entire left side
    1. Pain on entire left side ranging from pins and needles to being stabbed with a knife
    2. Pain is especially intense in hand and foot which are extremely sensitive to touch and temperature. I usually cover them with gloves and socks; but, right now I can put socks on.
    3. Pains especially sensitive to heat and cold. On a hot day it feels like I have a very intense sunburn on my arm and hand, even though the glove.
    4. A cold day feels like I’m dunking my hand in an ice water bath. It almost burns.
    5. I tend to drift left if I don’t pay attention to how I walk and sometimes drag the heel a bit and on rare days pain prevents me from walking for periods of time.
2. Hemorrhagic stroke resulted in urinary incontinence, occasional fecal incontinence and occasional bowel constipation
  1. Urinary incontinence daily and sometimes several times a day.
  2. The stress of an incontinence episode also has a significant effect on blood pressure as pissing yourself is extremely embarrassing and stressful.
  3. Constipation was an almost daily event and very painful until I changed my diet.
3. Hemorrhagic stroke has limited my ability to touch type as the hand has less coordination and is overly sensitive – typing causes pain. Keystrokes are often missed even though I think that I press the keys.
4. Hemorrhagic stroke also means my hand sometimes randomly gives out and just lets go of things, especially things that are above the weight of a ream of paper.
5. Ischemic stroke seems to have affected hearing, vision and memory.
  1. Palmer has difficulty hearing people clearly,
  2. Significantly more tinnitus (The medical term for ringing in the ears.) especially in the left ear,
  3. Noted limited memory, especially for sound based communications.
  4. Slight yellowing to vision.
  5. Ischemic stroke also seems to have had a mild effect on balance and causes mild lateropulsion (drifting) to the left that Palmer has to pay attention to.
6. Cognitive Impairment:
  1. Anomic Aphasia – Palmer has issues with anomic aphasia. A type of aphasia characterized by significant difficulty with word retrieval or naming items. Anomic aphasia happens when you have trouble finding a word you need to say or write down. It can feel like the word is on the tip of your tongue, making conversations difficult. This language disorder is common after a stroke (about a third of stroke survivors have some form of aphasia).
    1. Anomic Aphasia has a functional impact on Palmer’s ability to communicate.
    2. The information/word is often in memory and Palmer can describe it but it takes Palmer hours if not days to recall it, if he can at all. This significantly delays Palmer’s ability to write motions and work product. Palmer has begun relying on AI to find the missing word or words by describing them to the AI.
  2. Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) – Auditory Processing Disorder (APD) is a neurological condition that affects how the brain interprets, organizes, processes and retains memory of sounds.
    1. Palmer struggles with the ability to hear and remember spoken information details. Palmer’s long-term Auditory Memory does not effectively work; at best he is able to remember the “gist”. He does not remember the long-term details of spoken information after the stroke. Palmer struggles to retain heard details while getting the “gist” and a few key events of spoken information unless the information is preserved in writing. This has a significant functional impact on communications which will impact Palmer’s ability in trial.
    2. For example, Palmer, a former musician now struggles to remember lyrics even after hearing a song dozens or hundreds of times! In most cases he is unable to do it for an entire song. Also Palmer has counseling once a week but will not remember what was discussed the next day. This is one of the reasons why Palmer requested his attorneys to put everything in WRITING – they of course refused because that would give Palmer too much solid evidence against them!
    3. This has effectively prevented Palmer from addressing the violations of the CJC’s by the court, answer and object to the findings of fact effectively and file multiple mandamus and other actions against both the state and the court.
  3. Concentration Difficulty – Palmer has difficulty with long term concentration beyond about 15-30 minutes and seeks dopamine coping strategies to compensate which is known to his mental health counselor. Palmer also seeks sleep as quite often he is quite frankly exhausted due to constant sleep interruption from pain, incontinence and other issues.
  4. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System
    1. Stroke – 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1 (Listing of Impairments), Section 11.00 (Neurological). Specifically, Listing 11.04 (Vascular insult to the brain), and its implementing regulations, 20 C.F.R. § 404.1505, which acknowledges cognitive impairments can prevent substantial gainful activity.
    2. APD – While not a specific listing, APD would be evaluated under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, Section 2.00 (Special Senses and Speech) for hearing loss (2.10) or, if primarily affecting cognitive/communication functions, potentially under 12.02 (Neurocognitive disorders) or by assessing its impact on residual functional capacity.
  5. Case Law,
    1. Stroke is recognized under WALD as it is recognized by the medical community as a “physiological disorder, or condition” that affects multiple body systems. Taylor v. Burlington N. R.R. Holdings, Inc., 444 P. 3d 606, 607, 193 Wash.2d 611 (2019) (obesity always qualifies as an impairment under the plain language of RCW 49.60.040(7)(c)(i) because it is recognized by the medical community as a “physiological disorder, or condition” that affects multiple body systems….”)
    2. Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corp., 526 U.S. 795 (1999), further supports that individuals with disabilities, including cognitive impairments, are entitled to protection under relevant statutes. Palmer notes “January 7, 1994: Cleveland suffered a stroke, which damaged her concentration, memory, and language skills.” at 798.
7. Neurological Pain (Neuropathies) –
  1. The strokes resulted in pain in Palmer’s entire left side, especially in the hands, arms, calves and feet, which are extremely sensitive to cold or heat and swelling. The pain affects – memory, concentration, sleep, blood pressure, walking and Palmers typing which affects his ability to prepare for court.;
  2. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System
    1. Neuropathy is typically evaluated under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 11.00 – Neurological Disorders, Listing 11.14 for Peripheral Neuropathy
    2. Case law supports the consideration of pain, including neuropathic pain, as a significant impairment in disability determinations. Courts have acknowledged that pain can be disabling when it is severe, persistent, and interferes with the ability to perform work-related activities. For example, the neurological pain makes Palmer suffer when he tries to type.
    3. Neurological Pain requires significant adaptation in Palmer’s daily activities and sleep. The pain increases if it is subjected to heat, cold or touch. It also requires that Palmer make daily trips by bus into town to get the specialized food to treat my disabilities since I have to use a cart and have to limit its weight as that also affects the pain.
    4. Pain also affects sleep as the pain interrupts sleep which leaves Palmer sleep deprived and exhausted.This is especially true since it is interrelated with the pain from several of the other disabilities including: Damaged Left Shoulder, Damaged Right Hand and Right Elbow and Arm Pain.
  3. Caselaw
    1. Taylor v. Burlington N. R.R. Holdings, Inc., 193 Wn.2d 240, 439 P.3d 639 (2019): While this case specifically dealt with obesity, the Washington Supreme Court reiterated the broad interpretation of “impairment” under the WLAD. It emphasized that the WLAD’s definition of “disability” is broader than the ADA’s and does not require an impairment to be caused by a separate physiological disorder. This principle supports the idea that chronic pain itself, if medically recognized, can be an impairment under the WLAD.
8. Sensory Deficits – Palmer has sensory deficits on the left side in touch, hearing and vision.
  1. Hearing – During the SSI medical exam it was noted that Palmer has reduced hearing on the left side in part due to increased tinnitus (The medical term for ringing in the ears.);
  2. Reduction of touch sensation on the left side – During the SSI medical exam it was noted that Palmer has reduced sensation on his left side as he was unable to feel the neuropathy filament pokes. The sensory deficit was also noted during diabetic testing at Palmer’s naturopaths.
9. Motor Impairment In Strength, Range Of Motion And Function (hemiparesis) – Palmer has left side pain, limited range of movement, limited strength, random grip failure, extended difficulty with walking (limps, drifts left, random tripping over nothing, movement pain) due to the damage from the stroke
  1. Ultra-Low Typing Speed (see Exhibit 1) – Typing is actually physically painful to Palmer and combined with the physical damage to the right hand and the stroke damage in the left hand means that Palmer types at a very low speed now. Online typing tests indicate Palmer’s typing rate is less than 10 words per minute.
  2. Slow Reading Speed (see Exhibit 2) – Palmer has about 3 hours a day to work on his case due to his disabilities requiring extra sleep and walking very slowly to do activities of daily living (ADLs). Based on 7000 pages of discovery and my reading speed of 130 words per minute to have 100% comprehension and Gemini AI’s estimate of about 300 words per page with 12 point type and double line spacing it would take Palmer 269.23 hours or about 90 days to read that discovery even once. Palmer has about 3 hours a day to work on his case due to his disabilities requiring extra sleep and having to use the bus for ADLs..
  3. Ultra-Slow Walking – Palmer had to be retrained to walk after the hemorrhagic stroke. Walking hurts Palmer due to the neuropathy and often feet and ankle swelling from reduced circulation due to the cardio-vasculer issues. Based on timed tests Palmer walks at about 25 minutes per mile.
10. Urinary And Fecal Incontinence –
  1. Palmer has both urinary and limited fecal incontinence due to the stroke. In addition to taking lots of bathroom breaks, Palmer frequently is required to change absorbent materials and sometimes clothes. Urinary and limited fecal incontinence also disrupts Palmer’s sleep and results in exhaustion and need for additional sleep.
    Urinary Incontinence is comorbid with high blood pressure.
  2. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System
    1. Severe urinary incontinence would be evaluated under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, Section 6.00 (Genitourinary Impairments), or based on its impact on a claimant’s residual functional capacity due to the need for unscheduled breaks, limited sitting, or other disruptions.
11. Comorbidity – In addition to the stroke damage, some causation is due to diabetic sugar spikes, high blood pressure, reduced blood flow due to heart disease, the depressions, urinary incontinence stress, hearing issues, especially tinnitus.
Disabilities Related To Emotional Trauma
1. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) – Palmer is currently under treatment for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Palmer suffered severe emotional trauma due to the corrupt courts, corrupt counsel and corrupt cops of Grays Harbor County and attempted murder of Palmer by the Grays Harbor County Sheriff’s office through denial of prescribed medication for blood pressure and chest pain. He also experienced trauma in prison through attempted murder by denial of prescribed medication and needed emergency medical treatment which resulted in three easily preventable strokes. Palmer suffered severe emotional trauma from the knowing abuse of his son by CPS through starvation. As well as his son’s abuse by Deanna Drummond and PD. All of which was primarily due to the corruption within the Grays Harbor County Courts and the courts violation of Palmer’s and his sons constitutional rights.
  1. Palmer’s currently seeing a mental health professional about PTSD and BPD. Palmer’s primary triggers include corrupt, biased and/or prejudicial: courts, cops, council, and CPS and lack of access to the courts, especially in Grays Harbor!
2. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System PTSD
  1. PTSD is explicitly recognized as a disability by the Social Security Administration, particularly under listings related to mental disorders (20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 12.00 – Mental Disorders). Listing 12.15 specifically addresses PTSD,
3. Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) – Palmer is currently under treatment for Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) which is a mental illness that significantly affects a person’s ability to regulate their emotions. This can lead to instability in their self-image, interpersonal relationships, and behavior. It’s one of 10 personality disorders identified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5-TR).
  1. Palmer takes a significant amount of anti anxiety medication which helps with BPD; however, he has still had some issues with the court clerk’s office when he elevated his voice because he only got 10 minutes to access Odyssey. Which basically made Odyssey useless to him because of his other disabilities.
4. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System BPD
  1. This condition is recognized as a disability by the Social Security Administration, particularly under listings related to mental disorders (20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 12.00 – Mental Disorders). Listing 12.08 (Personality and Impulse-Control Disorders) for BPD. While there isn’t a specific listing solely for BPD, its symptoms and functional limitations are evaluated under the general criteria for personality disorders and other relevant mental health listings. Case law supports the recognition of personality disorders, including BPD, as potentially disabling conditions, with courts often focusing on the severity of symptoms such as emotional dysregulation, impulsivity, and interpersonal difficulties, and how these symptoms impact an individual’s ability to maintain employment and social functioning.
5. Depression Due To The PTSD And BPD – Palmer has been advised that the diagnosed PTSD and BPD also cause depression which affects sleep and concentration.
6. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System Depression
  1. The Social Security Administration recognizes depression as a disability, particularly under listings related to mental disorders (20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 12.00 – Mental Disorders). Listing 12.04 (Depressive, Bipolar and Related Disorders) for depression.Depression, especially when associated with other mental health conditions like PTSD and BPD, is evaluated under criteria that address affective disorders and the impact of multiple impairments on overall functioning.
7. Case law supports the recognition of depression, including secondary depression arising from other mental health conditions, as a potentially disabling condition. Courts acknowledge the interplay between mental health disorders and how they can collectively affect an individual’s ability to maintain employment and daily life activities.
8. The depression specifically leads to some of Palmer’s need for additional sleep!
Disabilities Related To Metabolic Disorders
1. Obesity:
  1. Palmer is currently under treatment for obesity. Obesity Always Qualifies As An Impairment – Taylor v. Burlington N. R.R. Holdings, Inc., 444 P. 3d 606, 607, 193 Wash.2d 611 (2019) (“The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified the following question to this court: “Under what circumstances, if any, does obesity qualify as an `impairment’ under the [WLAD, RCW] 49.60.040?” Order Certifying Question to Wash. Supreme Ct., Taylor v. Burlington N. R.R. Holdings, Inc., 904 F.3d 846, 853 (9th Cir. 2018). We answer that obesity always qualifies as an impairment under the plain language of RCW 49.60.040(7)(c)(i) because it is recognized by the medical community as a “physiological disorder, or condition” that affects multiple body systems listed in the statute.”)
  2. Palmer Is Disabled By Obesity based on the National Institute Of Healths calculator (https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/educational/lose_wt/BMI/bmicalc.htm) asPalmer is 6 feet tall and currently weigh about 240 pounds resulting in a BMI of 32.5. Obesity is a BMI above 30.
  3. Obesity requires significant adaptation in Palmer’s daily activities, medication and eating. It also requires that Palmer make daily trips by bus into town to get the specialized food to treat the disability. This is especially true since it is interrelated/comorbid with several of the other disabilities including: heart disease, high blood pressure and diabetes.
2. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System Obesity:
  1. Obesity is considered by the SSA if it causes or contributes to limitations in conjunction with other listed impairments. See SSR 02-1p, Titles II and XVI: Evaluation of Obesity.
  2. According to Social Security Ruling (SSR) 02-01, obesity is considered an impairment that, when severe, can affect the musculoskeletal, respiratory, cardiovascular, and endocrine systems, and can be a factor in determining disability.
  3. Obesity contributes to Palmer’s limitations in conjunction with high blood pressure and coronary artery disease for which obesity is a primary contributing factor for metabolic syndrome.

Ultra-High Blood Pressure:
1. Palmer’s currently under treatment for ultra-high blood pressure.
2. According to the Washington The Department of Health website (https://doh.wa.gov/you-and-your-family/illness-and-disease-z/heart-disease/manage-blood-pressure ) “If your systolic blood pressure is higher than 180, and/or your diastolic blood pressure is higher than 120, get emergency care now. As that is a HYPERTENSIVE CRISIS (consult your doctor immediately)
3. According to the National Institute of Health – National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/high-blood-pressure):
  1. High Blood Pressure Stage = 140 or higher systolic pressure OR 90 or higher diastolic pressure
  2. Hypertensive Crisis = Higher than 180 systolic pressure OR Higher than 120 diastolic pressure (Contact your provider immediately.)
4. Most likely Palmer’s high blood pressure is due to – hyperaldosteronism.
  1. This blood pressure is highly reactive to stress which requires sleeping more to try to reduce stress!
  2. This high blood pressure is highly reactive to sodium!
5. Palmer’s high blood pressure requires significant adaptation in daily activities, sleep, medication and eating. It also requires that Palmer make daily trips by bus into town to get the specialized food to treat the disability. This is especially true since it is interrelated with several of the other disabilities including: heart disease, obesity, diabetes and stroke.
6. Increase Sleep – Palmer’s High Blood Pressure tends to run ultra-high and is only semi-controlled. Almost every day it exceeds 170/100 and Palmer has to stop everything, take extra meds and a nap to get it back down below 160/90.
7. At above 200/120 Palmer faces significant risk of stroke.
8. High blood pressure is known as “The Silent Killer” because there is no way to determine blood pressure except through testing. Palmer has to test the blood pressure multiple times per day so he can adjust his medications if systolic pressure is above 170.
  1. Clonidine bounce WILL kill me or cause stroke if I miss that medication and has placed me in the hospital multiple times.
  2. BP below 130 systolic also sometimes results in an inability to walk and fainting.
9. Hypertension is evaluated based on the damage it causes to end-organs (e.g., heart, brain, kidneys).
SSA evaluates hypertension under cardiovascular system listings (20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 4.00 – Cardiovascular System
1. Dismissal Motions – Since the trial will be a high stress incident to me I fully expect to have systolic pressure over 180 on a daily basis which endangers Palmer’s life!!! I may need a 911 evacuation to a hospital to get liquid hydralazine which seems to work best to lower my blood pressure in any crisis situation. Reducing stress results in a more stable and lower blood pressure is one of the primary reasons I’m moving for dismissal on multiple points!

Coronary Artery Disease And Heart Disease (with an apparent recent and silent heart attack);
1. Palmer is currently under treatment for Coronary Artery Disease and Heart Disease
2. Palmer is currently under treatment for arteriosclerotic heart disease, coronary artery disease, some issues with tachycardia and heart attack. Coronary Artery Disease and Heart Disease requires significant adaptation in Palmer’s daily activities, sleep, medication and eating. Coronary Artery Disease and Heart Disease also requires that Palmer make daily trips by bus into town to get the specialized food to treat the disability. This significantly affects Palmer’s ability to do exercise and intense activities.
3. This is especially true since it is interrelated with several of the other disabilities including: high blood pressure, obesity and diabetes.
4. Walking Difficulty And Oxygen Deprivation – My heart is no longer able to provide enough blood and therefore enough oxygen to allow me to maintain what most people would consider a normal activity level including walking. (I walk extremely slowly at about 25 minutes to the mile per timed walking tests. Any faster than that and I often have to stop to catch my breath.)
5. Edema, Pain And Sleep – Palmer has significant edema to the point that the swelling causes pain which affects Palmer’s concentration and ability to move about. The only way to effectively deal with that that Palmer has available is sleep which puts his body horizontal so that his heart can pump the blood and fluid out of the feet, ankles and calves!
Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System
1. Coronary Artery Disease and Heart Attack are evaluated under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, Section 4.00 (Cardiovascular System) and 4.04 (Ischemic heart disease) and 4.02 (Chronic heart failure), which consider symptoms like chest pain, shortness of breath, and objective findings from tests.

Diabetes Mellitus Type 2 –
1. Palmer Is currently under treatment for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, which substantially limits one or more major life activities and requires significant adaptation in Palmer’s life and affects is recognized by the medical community as a “physiological disorder, or condition” that affects multiple body systems.
2. Diabetes requires significant adaptation to Palmer’s daily activities, sleep , medication and eating. It also requires that I make daily trips by bus into town to get the specialized low carb food to treat the disability.
3. https://diabetes.org/tools-support/know-your-rights/discrimination/is-diabetes-a-disability . Diabetes is a disability because it substantially limits the function of the endocrine system. This is the system that regulates insulin and blood glucose (sugar). Diabetes is still a disability, even if a person is healthy and diabetes is well-managed. This internal limitation is enough—no outside limitation is necessary. This means diabetes can be an “invisible” disability.
4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9561544/. Stress-Induced Diabetes: A Review “It has long been established that stress has a significant impact on metabolic function. Type 2 diabetes may be initiated by psychological and physical stress. The central and peripheral nervous systems are both involved in the neuroendocrine framework that underlies the underlying processes. The release of catecholamines and a rise in serum glucocorticoid concentrations caused by psychological stress enhance the requirement for insulin and insulin resistance. Experiencing persistent hyperglycemia in people with diabetes may be influenced by stress. Blood sugar levels may rise due to hormones being released in response to stress. Although this has adaptive significance in a healthy patient, in the long run, it can cause insulin resistance and lead to diabetes. Additionally, diabetes may cause abnormalities in the regulation of these stress hormones.” Palmer used sleep to reduce stress!
5. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System Diabetes Mellitus Type 2
  1. The Social Security Administration’s definition of a disability, as evidenced by listings under 20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, specifically sections 9.00 (Endocrine Disorders) Rated under 38 C.F.R. § 4.119 (Endocrine System), specifically Diagnostic Code 7913 (Diabetes mellitus). Ratings are based on the severity of required daily insulin, dietary restrictions, and complications, including neuropathy (relevant to neurological pain, hand/feet issues), retinopathy, nephropathy or acidosis.
Case law
1. Lawson v. Social Sec. Admin., 192 F.3d 901 (9th Cir. 1999), supports the recognition of diabetes as a disabling condition under the Social Security Act, depending on its severity and impact on the Is Diabetes An ADA Disability
Disabilities Related To Musculoskeletal Damage
1. These musculoskeletal impairments are evaluated under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, Section 1.00 (Musculoskeletal System). Relevant listings include:
2. 1.02 (Major dysfunction of a major peripheral joint) for shoulder, hand, elbow, and hip arthritis/damage.
3. 1.04 (Disorders of the spine) for degenerative disk disease and sciatica.
4. These listings require objective medical evidence of anatomical deformity, chronic pain and stiffness with limited motion, and significant functional limitations (e.g., inability to ambulate effectively, inability to use upper extremities).
5. Degenerative Disk Disease and Sciatica;
  1. Palmer has degenerative disk disease and recurrent sciatica which causes limitation of range of motion, functional impact and pain which substantially limits one or more major life activities.
  2. Palmer’s sciatica is a variable pain issue. The pain can range from a dull ache in the kidney area down to the thigh, or it can be so incapacitating that Palmer can barely move and has to use a back brace and specialized equipment for hygiene.
  3. Sciatica requires significant adaptation in Palmer’s daily activities. It also affects sleep as the pain interrupts sleep which leaves Palmer sleep deprived and exhausted.
  4. Severe sciatica pain hits once or twice a year. Palmer has to wear a high-end back brace with an internal frame to even walk and move.
  5. Palmer has had two falls so far due to pain so intense he could not stand.
  6. The pain currently means that Palmer has difficulty putting on socks and shoes and cutting toenails. Palmer therefore wears slip-on boots and typically only changes socks and showers once a week.
  7. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System Degenerative Disk Disease and Sciatica
    1. Degenerative disk disease and sciatica are musculoskeletal impairments and are evaluated under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, Section 1.00 (Musculoskeletal System). Relevant listing 1.04 (Disorders of the spine) for degenerative disk disease and sciatica.
6. Right Shoulder Torn Rotator Cuff With An Almost Detached Subscapularis Tendon;
  1. This disability was actually rated by the Department of Labor and Industries as a disability, rated at a 12% total body disability back in 2009. Additionally, the 2009 work limits from L and I included 15# above head lift limit; 30# to waist lift; unable to reach behind back and several range of movement limits.
  2. Further decline has happened since 2009. For example, lifting a 2 liter bottle is so painful that I try to buy 1 liter bottles of water and soda. Palmer moved a standard box of paper which contained discovery and was in significant pain for several days after.
  3. It also affects sleep as the pain interrupts sleep which leaves Palmer exhausted.
  4. LandI provided Palmer significant adaptive equipment – a body built chair, Dragon Naturally Speaking, special keyboard and mouse (Palmer had a custom built computer server at that time.) Those accommodations are no longer available due to prison.
  5. Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System Right Shoulder Torn Rotator Cuff With An Almost Detached Subscapularis Tendon. Musculoskeletal impairments and are evaluated under 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, Section 1.00 (Musculoskeletal System). 1.02 (Major dysfunction of a major peripheral joint) for shoulder, hand, elbow, and hip arthritis/damage.
7. Damaged Left Shoulder;
  1. This disability affects Palmer’s activities of daily life in about the same way as the Right Shoulder Torn Rotator Cuff with much more limited movement than right shoulder. For example Palmer can’t lift elbow above shoulder making it hard to rinse his left armpit in the shower.
  2. Also much more pain in the left shoulder especially from weight. This is most likely comorbid W from the strok with the neuropathy pain from the stroke.
  3. The two shoulder injuries meant that:
    1. Palmer couldn’t mop the floor with the standard commercial mop without significant pain and had to stop due to the weight of the wet mop head
    2. Palmer needs to use a wheeled rolling bag (Rolser brand) to do ADLs and does not carry a shoulder bag or backpack with even just a laptop or backpack on the shoulders. Palmer does carry a Targus brand small personal accessory bag/purse. (Palmer will most likely use a rolling legal/laptop briefcase to accommodate his shoulders weight limits and get to and from court.)

Damaged Right Hand;
1. Palmer has a damaged right hand due to a fall in 2010. The damaged right hand requires significant adaptation in Palmer’s daily activities as Palmer is unable to fully close the hand, especially the pointer finger. The hand has limited range of movement and strength. It especially limits Palmer’s typing ability.
Right Elbow And Arm Pain;
1. Palmer has a disability, specifically Right Elbow and Arm Pain, which substantially limits one or more major life activities.
2. Right Elbow and Arm Pain requires significant adaptation in my daily activities as I have limited range of movement and strength. For example, lifting a 2 liter bottle is so painful that I try to buy 1 liter bottles of water and soda. It also affects sleep as the pain interrupts sleep which leaves Palmer exhausted.This is especially true since it is interrelated with several of the other pain causing disabilities including: Damaged Left Shoulder, Damaged Right Hand and Right Shoulder Torn Rotator Cuff.
Arthritis In My Hips;
1. This notice is to inform you that I have a disability, specifically arthritis in my hips, which substantially limits one or more major life activities. This condition can be considered a disability under the Social Security Administration, particularly under listings related to musculoskeletal disorders (20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 1.00 – Musculoskeletal System). Specifically, hip arthritis may be evaluated under listings that address major joint dysfunction. Case law supports the recognition of arthritis as a potentially disabling condition, with courts often focusing on the condition’s impact on an individual’s ability to walk, stand, sit, and perform other weight-bearing activities necessary for employment.
1. Degenerative Disk Disease
  1. This notice is to inform you that I have a disability, specifically degenerative disc disease, which substantially limits one or more major life activities. This condition can be considered a disability under the Social Security Administration, particularly under listings related to musculoskeletal disorders (20 CFR Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, 1.00 – Musculoskeletal System). Degenerative disc disease is often evaluated under listings that address disorders of the spine, and how these disorders impact an individual’s ability to perform work-related activities. Case law supports the recognition of degenerative disc disease as a potentially disabling condition, with courts often focusing on the condition’s impact on an individual’s ability to walk, stand, sit, lift, and perform other physical tasks necessary for employment.
  2. The Department of Veterans Affairs also recognizes degenerative disc disease as a disability. This is evidenced by the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities under 38 CFR Part 4, which includes diagnostic codes for conditions of the spine, including degenerative disc disease (e.g., diagnostic code 5293). The VA system allows for a comprehensive evaluation of the functional limitations resulting from degenerative disc disease. These citations, along with supporting medical documentation, establish that degenerative disc disease is a recognized disability, potentially requiring reasonable accommodations to ensure equal access and opportunity.
2. Hips (Arthritis): based on limitation of motion, ankylosis, or other dysfunction.
Social Security Administration (SSA) Disability Rating System
Comorbid, Cumulative, Synergistic And Exacerbation Effects
1. It is also likely that some of the causation is due to diabetic sugar spikes, high blood pressure, reduced blood flow due to heart disease, the depressions, urinary incontinence stress, hearing issues, especially tinnitus. (The medical term for ringing in the ears.)

Frostbite Right Foot Two Toes
1. From childhood
2. Two far toes on right foot experience pain when cold and have lower sensation.

EXAMPLES OF ACCOMMODATIONS –
- Federal Courts –
  1. Appointment of counsel: In cases where the disability severely impacts the litigant’s ability to represent themselves adequately, federal courts may consider appointing counsel as a necessary accommodation to ensure due process.
  2. Auxiliary aids and services: This aligns with the state law and includes providing necessary tools for communication and participation based on the specific disability.
  3. Procedural modifications: Federal courts are also expected to make reasonable adjustments to their procedures to accommodate disabilities, ensuring the individual can understand and participate in the legal process.
- State Courts – Based on these state laws, a disabled pro se defendant in Washington could argue for various accommodations, including:
  1. Appointment of co-counsel: If the disability significantly impairs the ability to understand the proceedings, follow instructions, concentrate, or communicate effectively, the court may be required to appoint an attorney as a reasonable accommodation under GR 33.
  2. Auxiliary aids and services: Depending on the nature of the disability, this could include providing documents in alternative formats (large print, Braille, audio), qualified readers, sign language interpreters, real-time transcription, or allowing the assistance of a cognitive interpreter or support person.
  3. Modifications to procedures: This could involve allowing more time to understand documents and prepare, breaks during proceedings, conducting hearings in accessible locations or via alternative means (e.g., phone), or simplifying communication and instructions.

IV. BRIEF PART 3: REQUESTED ACCOMMODATIONS AND PURPOSE

A list of the illegal acts Palmer wanted his counsel to do per judge Samuel’s allegation that Palmer asked his attorneys to do illegal acts.
MSI Raider 18 HX 18″ Gaming Laptop –
1. intel Core Ultra 9 285HX – NVIDIA RTX 5090 – 2560×1600 – Windows 11 – 64GB RAM – 2TB SSD (Exhibit 4) –
2. With this laptop Palmer can run Ollama to use various mid-level Mixtures of Expert reasoning AI models like Mixtral (Mistral AI) with 8x7B parameters (effectively 45B total, ~13B active); DeepSeek-R1 32b parameters is ~20 GB; Qwen Series qwq:32b parameters (dense) ~20 GB active, qwen3:30b-a3b parameters (MoE) ~19 GB and Phi-4 Reasoning / Reasoning Plus (Microsoft) 14B parameters ~9.1 GB.
3. All data stays local on the laptop so it meets security requirements.
4. The system is powerful enough to handle the Smart Chunking on 7000 pages with a 100,000 token content window and data should be fairly easy to chunk and embed in a Vector Database so it can be read and analyzed using RAG.
5. This laptop should also fit in Palmer’s rolling briefcase for transport to and from court so there is very limited weight applied to his disabled shoulder.
Legal AI Access – Palmer currently uses AI and document search to compensate for his disabilities and is requesting the following accommodations:
1. Westlaw Legal Software with Ediscovery and Co-Counsel
  1. Palmer plans to use AI based legal software to accommodate disabilities and prepare for retrial and dismissal. Palmer has spoken with Westlaw and been advised that they cost will be about $550 a month.
  2. Palmer requests a subscription to Westlaw and its AI system Co-Council Which would allow Palmer to dump the discovery into an ediscovery system which then becomes searchable by the Co-Council AI so Palmer does not have to read as much of the Discovery and maintain comprehension. He just needs to search with AI.
  3. Co-Counsel is a Mixture of Experts (MoE) AI built with Anthropic using Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and Claude’s AI (Claude 3 Haiku and Claude 3 Sonnet) with security provided by Amazon Bedrock. Thomson Reuters studies show a 30% to 50% reduction in time to prepare. Co-Counsel is so accurate that it is now being used in federal courts as in April 2025, Thomson Reuters was awarded a multi-year contract with the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AO) giving the Federal Judiciary, including the Supreme Court, all U.S. circuit, district, and bankruptcy courts access to Westlaw Precision with CoCounsel, Practical Law, and CoCounsel. (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoqcSIcdx-Y )
  4. U.S. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE – This also is a constitutional matter for Palmer concerning US Const.: Amend. 1 – Right To Petition and Freedom of Speech; Ament. 5 – Due Process, Amend. 6 – Meaningful Self-Representation and Speedy Trial (Studies of Ediscovery systems consistently show that they reduced trial preparation time by around 30%. Per Gemini AI “Some organizations have reported significant reductions (e.g., 40-65%)”); Amend. 14 – Due Process and Equal Protection (Westlaw with Co-Counsel is currently available for public use at the King County Law Library and the Washington State Law Library has it but not for public use. Which creates a significant disparity in court access and speedy trial for Palmer as with his disabilities he cannot get from Gray Harbor to King County to use Westlaw with Co-Counsel on the bus system and return to Grays Harbor the same day.)
  5. Palmer also includes the related Washington State Constitutional Rights under Article 1, Sections 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 12, 14* (No cruel punishment), 22, 29, 30 and 32.
  6. *(No cruel punishment – Palmer is homeless and has been twice denied housing including a tiny home because of these charges which should have been dismissed back in 2018. Further, per my former council, Mr. Moore – if reconvicted Palmer would face only about two months of confinement because he has already served a substantial amount of time. So effectively this court has held Palmer in homelessness, suffering, denied full medical treatment for his disabilities and injustice for nearly two years based on a potential of serving two months in prison!!! Palmer believes this is more than enough to qualify as “Cruel Punishment”)
  7. This is also an equal justice, court access and speedy trial issue as Palmer would have access to Westlaw Legal Software with Ediscovery and Co-Counsel in King County (see Exhibit 3). Due to his disabilities and income Palmer rides the bus and cannot reach King County on a daily basis and return whereas anyone with a car can and have access to Westlaw Legal Software with Ediscovery and Co-Counsel. E-discovery case studies often cite dramatic reductions in the hours spent on document review, sometimes by 50% to over 90%. (see Casepoint – “Am Law 200 Firm Lewis Roca Reduces Document Review Time by Over 90%”.
2. Whisper AI (from Open AI) or Dragon Legal Individual for talking to typing. (Dragon was the software that L and I provided Palmer for accommodations back in 2009 and it is on system so it meets security requirements.)
3. WhisperX – (16 GB or higher) Large models (large-v2, large-v3): Require at least 8 GB, and ideally 10 GB or more of VRAM for optimal performance, especially with larger batch sizes or when using features like diarization.
4. Funding For Unaligned/Unrestricted/Uncensored AI To Create Multi-Agent Systems (MAS); Mixture-of-Agents (MoA) and/or AI Debate AI Models –
  Standard AI (Open AI, Google, CoPilot) has guardrails (censorship) the prevents Palmer from working with subjects the involve alleged child molestation and child assault. Palmer needs to locally load Unaligned/Unrestricted/Uncensored AI like:
  1. Uncensored-Llama-3-70B (Large Language Model)
  2. Mixtral 8x22B (Mixture-of-Experts)
  3. Qwen (Dense Experts Model)
  4. DeepSeek-R1 (Reasoning)
  5. Unknown AI (Monte Carlo Tree Search)
  6. Unknown AI (Chain-of-Thought)
  7. Alpha AI’s
5. Funding For Unaligned/Unrestricted/Uncensored AI Image Generation –
  1. FLUX
  2. Stable Diffusion
6. Ending Lies and Corruption – Palmer also needs that AI software because his Standby Council is inadequate and a liar and Palmer has zero confidence in her! She’s violated the rules of professional conduct and breached her highest ethical duty to Palmer which has triggered Palmers PTSD and BPD! That has been the problem with all past counsel – LYING!
  While this court has claimed that Palmer’s attorneys were not liars. Palmer now has solid written proof that Mrs. Young is! (see
Court Documents
1. Real-time Transcription with hard copy – This is supported by Duvall v. County of Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1128 (9th Cir. 2001), K.M. v. Tustin Unified Sch. Dist., 725 F. 3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2013) and “Ensuring Equal Access for People with Disabilities: A Guide for Washington Courts” (Washington Courts website): which references federal regulations that apply in Washington and explicitly lists “real-time computer-aided transcription services” as an auxiliary aid.
2. Copies Of All Transcripts Up To This Point – Palmer is currently unable to respond to several issues and findings because he cannot remember what was said therefore he needs transcripts.for all hearings.
  1. This is especially critical to Palmer at this point as he believes he objected to being forced to choose between his right to a speedy trial and some other constitutional right/rights by the Grays Harbor County Court. In violation of US v. Farias, 618 F.3d 1049, 1053-1054 (2010) (“A criminal defendant does not simply have the right to represent himself, but rather has the right to represent himself meaningfully. Meaningful representation requires time to prepare. Milton v. Morris, 767 F.2d 1443, 1446 (9th Cir.1985) (“[T]ime to prepare … [is] fundamental to a meaningful right of representation.”); see also Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, 59, 53 S.Ct. 55, 77 L.Ed. 158 (1932) (“It is vain to give the accused a day in court with no opportunity to prepare for it….” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Armant v. Marquez, 772 F.2d 552, 557-58 (9th Cir.1985) (holding that where a defendant had unequivocally invoked his right to proceed pro se the day before trial, the district court’s denial of his request for a continuance constituted an abuse of discretion and “effectively rendered his right to self-representation meaningless”); Barham v. Powell, 895 F.2d 19, 22 (1st Cir.1990) (“If [the defendant] needed that extra time to exercise his right to self-representation in a meaningful way, then denying him the time effectively deprived him of the right and may have been constitutional error.”). Although the district court never expressly denied Farias’s request to proceed pro se, it denied him the opportunity to prepare for trial and accordingly denied him his right to meaningful self-representation.”) “[A] right to proceed pro se without adequate time to prepare renders that right “meaningless.” Where a district court improperly denies time to prepare for trial, as in Armant, or improperly threatens to deny such time, as here, the harm is “no less than the effective denial of [a defendant’s] Constitutional right to self-representation.” Id. at 557” US v. Farias, 618 F.3d 1049, 1054 (2010).
3. Access to Odyssey to Access Critical Cases to Palmer’s Defense – The Grays Harbor County Clerk has limited Palmer’s access to Odyssey to as little as 10 minutes! That is not enough time for Palmer to do much of anything with his disabilities, especially low reading speed!
  The frustration due to his denial of access to the courts triggers both his PTSD and his BPD. Which has resulted in discussions with Court Bailiffs.
4. Access to VLex – The WSBA provides VLex to attorneys. Palmer would like access to VLex also to assist my AI’s with training and research relevant to my case.

Liberal Construction of Pleadings – Erickson v. Pardus, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 2200, 551 US 89 (2007) (A document filed pro se is “to be liberally construed,” Estelle [v. Gamble], 429 U.S., at 106, 97 S.Ct. 285 [1976], and “a pro se complaint, however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers,” ibid. (internal quotation marks omitted). Cf. Fed. Rule Civ. Proc. 8(f) (“All pleadings shall be so construed as to do substantial justice”.)
Written Prosecution Questions and Funding for Palmer’s Choice of Co-Counsel –
1. Palmer has noted a Cognitive Impairment disability due to stroke. He does not believe that he will be fully able to address the requirements and speed needed to make “Timely Objections” if this goes to trial instead of being dismissed.
  1. Judge Samuel told Palmer he needs to write his questions out and present them to her if Palmer remembers right. Palmer therefore asks that the state be asked to do the same so that Palmer with AI can analyze them for objection and file said objections as standing objections. Since that is may not be possible for co-examinations Palmer requests co-counsel to place those timely objections for him as a disability accommodation.
  2. He requests funding for co-counsel of his choice to object for him on all possible objections like Camille Vasquez did for Johnny Depp due to issues with short term memory especially with sound and concentration since the stroke.
  3. Palmer is not requesting counsel to represent him fully, especially since it does not appear that Grays Harbor County can provide counsel that does not lie to Palmer. With accommodations, Palmer is perfectly capable of understanding the law and if he could do this by writing then he could do it with AI assistance. Unfortunately the entire superior court trial system is prejudiced against people with hearing, cognitive and/or memory issues. The higher courts are not as almost everything is in writing.
2. Standby Counsel is Inadequate and a LIER! – In addition to his disabilities requiring Westlaw and Co Council as an accommodation, Palmer also needs that software because His Standby Council is inadequate and a liar and Palmer has zero confidence in her! She’s violated the rules of professional conduct and breached her highest ethical duty to not lie to Palmer which has triggered Palmers PTSD and BPD!
  1. Case Research – On 04/22/25, Palmer asked his alleged standby counsel, Karrie Young, when he first filed a CrR 5.1 (c ) motion so that he could challenge court findings and Mrs Young has still not provided that information as of 06/04/2024.
  2. Outright Lies About The Law In Violation of RPC 8.4(c) and Her Ethical Duty to Client –
    1. On 03/27/25 Palmer asked “Mrs Young I need current shepardized caselaw Citations showing:
      1. – An attorney must know the law;
      2. – A judge must know the law;”
    2. Mrs. Young replied “There are no cases to support your contention that an attorney must know the law and that a judge must know the law.” (see EXHIBIT 6)
    3. That is a lie!!! Walton v. Arizona, 497 US 639, 653 (1990) states “Trial judges are presumed to know the law and to apply it in making their decisions.” See also State v. Read, 147 Wn.2d 238, 242, 53 P.3d 26 (2002) (“in bench trials, judges are presumed to know and follow the law and thus not consider inadmissible.”); Oltman v. Holland Am. Line USA, Inc., 163 Wn.2d 236, 248, 178 P.3d 981 (2008) (“Trial courts are presumed to know the law and to follow it.”); In re Estate of Lint, 135 Wn.2d 527, 532, 957 P.2d 755 (1998) (“We presume that judges know the law and will follow instructions to disregard improper evidence.”)
    4. Ethical Duty – In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Dann, 137 Wn.2d 678, 695, 975 P.2d 492, 501 (1998) (Madsen, J., concurring) (“RPC 8.4(c) provides that “[it] is professional misconduct for a lawyer to … [e]ngage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.” Simply put, the question is whether the attorney lied. No ethical duty could be plainer.”)
Narrative Testimony – Palmer requests to write out and read his testimony rather than the typical question and answer testimony.
1. CJC 2.6 – Ensuring the Right to Be Heard: which states in comment “[4] Judges should endeavor to ensure unrepresented litigants have a fair opportunity to participate in proceedings. While not required, judges may find the following nonexhaustive list of steps consistent with these principles and helpful in facilitating the right of unrepresented litigants to be heard: …. 11. Permitting narrative testimony.”
Discovery – Palmer Also Notes 3 Things For The Record Concerning Meaningful Self Representation:
1. This court previously assigned two allegedly highly qualified but lying attorneys, Luke Laughlin and Jason Moore and they failed to be prepared after over a year of preparation TIME.
2. Palmer is not a highly qualified attorney and is severely disabled and can only realistically work about 3 hours a day due to ADL and sleep needs which realistically creates a situation where Palmer will need at least a year to meaningfully prepare!
3. Palmer has yet to receive the full discovery which Palmer has requested multiple times from the State in both trials. Discovery that Palmer is fully and legally entitled to under constitutional mandates found in Brady v. Maryland, 373 US 83 (1963) and Giglio v. United States, 405 US 150, 154 (1972). Palmer is fairly sure that the United States Constitution overrides court rules and based on Washington Constitution article 1, section 2 “”The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land.” Palmer will more fully address once he has time to go through the discovery he has received and discover what is missing!
Breaks – Palmer is requesting breaks every 2 hours to test blood pressure and urinate.
3 HOUR WORKDAY DUE TO DISABILITIES – Palmer has only about three hours to work on his defense each day due to the following:
1. Activities Of Daily Life (ADLs) – Due to: Neurological Pain and damage from the stroke which affects my walking gait, and balance; Obesity; Coronary Artery Disease and Heart Disease which limit my O2 supply, ability to walk up hill and makes me stop to catch my breath; pain from Hip Arthritis. Palmer’s walking speed is about 25 minutes per mile. Combined with homelessness and needing to take the bus – on an average day Palmer spends about 8-9 hours a day on ADL’s.
2. Sleep – Palmer uses sleep to treat: PTSD; BPD; depression; high blood pressure; neurological pain from three strokes; sciatica; hip arthritis; edema in the feet and calf and general exhaustion. Typically sleep uses 12 – 13 hours of the day!
3. WorkTime Availible – ADLs and sleep typically leaves Palmer 2 to 4 hours a day to work on trial preparation.
Initial Expert Witness Funding Sufficient Showing Of Need For Expert Funding –
1. Expert witnesses also help Palmer deal with his disabilities most specifically the PTSD and BPD. However in the first trial, palmer was denied expert witnesses because he was unable to make a sufficient showing of need for the expert witness. As he had no funding to get any kind of supporting letters from the expert witness as to their relevance and their benefit. Therefore, Palmer is asking for a fund to pay for a said letter.

V. BRIEF PART 4: PARITY
Palmer has been forced to be his own attorney. Parity means that Palmer’s inability to pay for a lawyer and/or Palmer’s status as a person with a disability, should not result in Palmer receiving a lesser quality of defense or being at a disadvantage in the legal system.

The Attorney’s Job is the Same, Period:
1. The attorney is held to the exact same high standards of professional competence and diligence as a lawyer charging top dollar. The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that the Sixth Amendment right to counsel means the right to “effective assistance of counsel,” and this standard applies equally to all attorneys, whether they are hired, appointed, or even volunteering.
2. Palmer must act with the same level of skill, knowledge, and thoroughness as any other reasonably competent lawyer in Palmer’s situation. Palmer can not do that but paired with AI he may come closer as AI has already passed the BAR exam.
WSBA Standards – Which serve as strong guidelines for local governments per RCW 10.101.030 and are more comprehensive than the Washington Supreme Court’s own standards. Based on the WSBA new Standards For Indigent Defense Access to obtain parity Palmer would be entitled to:
1. Investigators – Essential for gathering evidence, interviewing witnesses, and conducting field investigations. The standards recognize their critical role in trial preparation, including preserving evidence and assisting with impeachment.;
2. Mitigation Specialists/Social Workers – Crucial for understanding a client’s background, identifying factors that might impact sentencing, or addressing underlying issues (which can be especially important for individuals with disabilities);
3. Legal Assistants/Paralegals: Vital for administrative tasks, case management, processing discovery (electronic and otherwise), and ensuring critical information is accurately conveyed and recorded.
4. “Reasonable Compensation” for Resources – “market rate for similar legal and expert services.” Palmer’s funding should account for the entire infrastructure needed to provide a high-quality defense.This directly promotes parity in the operational “tools” and supports Palmer’s defense. This explicitly includes the cost of office overhead, support staff or services, training, supervision, and other services not separately funded.
5. Emphasis on Access to Investigators and Experts: The standards reiterate that appointed counsel should have reasonable compensation for experts of their choosing. This ensures that the defense can access specialized knowledge for scientific, forensic, medical, or other complex issues in a case, just as a prosecuting attorney or a private defense attorney could. The role of defense investigators is detailed, emphasizing their importance in identifying witnesses, gathering evidence, recording statements, and conducting field investigations – all essential “tools” for a robust defense. Palmer seeks parity with appointed counsel, especially with his disabilities.
6. Time – The new standards ensure that appointed attorneys have the time – a crucial “tool” – to dedicate to each case, allowing for thorough investigation, client communication, and trial preparation, thus achieving a quality of service comparable to what a client with a fully-resourced private attorney would receive.Palmer seeks parity with appointed counsel, especially with his disabilities.
7. The WSBA Standards explicitly state that public defense contracts should provide for or include “adequate administrative costs and support,” listing items such as:
  1. Telephones;
  2. Law library and/or electronic research capabilities (direct parity in fundamental legal research tools)
  3. Case management systems (essential organizational “tools”)
  4. Computers and software
  5. Office space and supplies
  6. Training
The WSBA ensures that the physical and technological infrastructure, which are vital “tools” for any modern legal practice, are available to appointed counsel. Palmer seeks parity with appointed counsel, especially with his disabilities, since he is now required to be his own attorney and provide the services of an attorney to himself.

VI. BRIEF PART 5: SUMMARY

Palmer was wrongfully convicted of crimes he did not legally commit in 2018 on charges that should have been dismissed due to cop perjury, court misconduct, counsel misconduct. That conviction is overturned and Palmer is on retrial.
In prison and jail Palmer was abused, tortured, crippled and had cops and staff attempt to murder him by denial of prescribed medication, denial of prescribed diet and denial of needed emergency treatment which resulted in three preventable strokes and left Palmer disabled – mentally and physically.
Palmer claims the following disabilities:
1. Stroke Damage Scarring In My Brain From Three Known Strokes/Vascular Insults resulting in:
  1. Cognitive Impairment:
    1. Anomic Aphasia;
    2. Auditory Processing Disorder (APD);
    3. Concentration Difficulty;
  2. Neurological Pain (Neuropathies) On My Entire Left Side;
  3. Reduction In Hearing Due to Increased Tinnitus;
  4. Reduction Of Touch Sensation On My Left Side;
  5. Urinary And Fecal Incontinence;
  6. Motor Impairment In Strength, Range Of Motion And Function
    1. Ultra-Low Typing Speed
    2. Slow Reading Speed
    3. Ultra-Slow Walking
2. Emotional Trauma
  1. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD);
  2. Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD);
  3. Depression Due To The PTSD And BPD;
3. Metabolic Disorder
  1. Obesity;
  2. Ultra-High Blood Pressure;
  3. Coronary Artery Disease And Heart Disease (with an apparent recent and silent heart attack);
  4. Diabetes;

Musculoskeletal Damage
1. Degenerative Disk Disease.
  1. Sciatica;
2. Right Shoulder Torn Rotator Cuff With An Almost Detached Subscapularis Tendon;
3. Damaged Left Shoulder;
4. Damaged Right Hand;
5. Right Elbow And Arm Pain;
6. Arthritis In My Hips;
Comorbid, Cumulative, Synergistic And Exacerbation Effects

State of Washington recognizes Palmer is fully disabled through DSHS and LandI both of which granted Palmer disability benefits.
The USA recognizes Palmer is fully disabled through the social security system which granted Palmer SSI.
For retrial Palmer was appointed lying and unethical counsel – Moore, Laughlin and Young. Their lies combined with religious discrimination from them triggered Palmer’s PTSD and BPD and he fought for his constitutional rights to the point that two competency hearings were held. Palmer was found to be competent and remains so.
Judge Samuel, who’s former counsel indicated was biased against Palmer but who has refused to withdraw, removed Palmer’s counsel thereby forcing him to go Pro Se and act as his own attorney.
Palmer is therefore asking for initial disability accommodations as listed in IV. BRIEF PART 3: REQUESTED ACCOMMODATIONS AND PURPOSE and V. BRIEF PART 4: PARITY. Accommodations that will allow him to, at parity with paid attorneys and WSBA standards, do the work of being his own attorney.

PLEASE REPLY TO PALMER CONCERNING THE REQUESTED DISABILITY ACCOMMODATIONS BY EMAIL AT SILENTDEATHPENALTY@GMAIL.COM

Dated 06/07/2025 At Aberdeen, Washington By: Michael Palmer

__________________________________

Exhibit 1
Typing Speed Tests

Exhibit 2

Reading Speed Tests

MOTION TO THE COURT FOR DISMISSAL

Michael Palmer, the Defendant, appearing pro se, moves, pursuant to Wash. Super. Ct. Crim. R. 8.3(b), the Fourteenth, Sixth, and First Amendments to the United States Constitution, article I §§ 3, 12, 22 of the Washington Constitution, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131–12134, § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and this Court’s inherent supervisory authority, for an order dismissing all charges with prejudice based on a systematic and knowing denial of federally mandated, under the ADAAA and other law, and essential disability accommodations, most especially denial of time to prepare and a pattern of governmental misconduct, law breaking and arbitrary action has deprived Defendant of fundamental constitutional rights and rendered a fair trial impossible.
The systematic denial of disability accommodations —integral to preparing an effective defense—violates multiple constitutional guarantees, federal and state statutory requirements and judicial ethical mandates, creating structural defects in the proceedings that mandate dismissal as the only adequate remedy.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Jurisdiction and Basis – Jurisdiction is invoked under the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the fundamental right of access to the courts as recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004). This motion also relies on appellate adjudications from the 9th Circuit and Washington State courts and incorporates the ethical imperatives set forth in the Code of Judicial Conduct along with CRR 3.8(b), which proscribes arbitrary governmental action that undermines a fair trial.
Defendant’s Documented Disabilities (see generally Exhibit 1 and Exhibit 2) – Defendant Michael Palmer suffers from multiple documented disabilities resulting from three strokes while in state custody and previous on the job injuries including:
1. Cognitive Disabilities:
  1. Anomic Aphasia
  2. Inability to remember spoken information long term
  3. Severe concentration difficulties
  4. Memory impairments
  5. Reduced reading speed (130 words per minute)
2. Physical Disabilities
  1. Neurological pain throughout left side
  2. Reduced hearing and touch sensation
  3. Motor impairments affecting strength and function
  4. Urinary and fecal incontinence
  5. Ultra-high blood pressure
  6. Coronary artery disease
  7. Diabetes
  8. Obesity
  9. Degenerative disk disease with sciatica
  10. Torn rotator cuff (12% total body disability rating from Labor & Industries)
  11. Damaged right hand
  12. Elbow pain in both arms
  13. Multiple musculoskeletal injuries
3. Mental Health Disabilities
  1. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)
  2. Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD)
  3. Depression
Government Recognition of Disabilities
1. Federal Recognition
  1. The Social Security Administration has granted full disability status with SSI payments, which by definition means defendant legally cannot work. See Barnhart v. Thomas, 540 U.S. 20, 23 (2003) (“A person is disabled, and thereby eligible for Social Security disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income (SSI), ‘only if his physical or mental impairment or impairments are of such severity that he is not only unable to do his previous work but cannot, considering his age, education, and work experience, engage in any other kind of substantial gainful work which exists in the national economy.’”).
State Recognition
1. The Department of Social and Health Services had placed the defendant on Aged, Blind and Disabled (ABD) payments Prior to his receiving SSI. Labor & Industries awarded 12% total body disability rating.
Accommodation Requests and Systematic Denials
1. Requested Accommodations – Defendant requested the following reasonable accommodations (See Exhibit 1):
  1. Extended time for case preparation
  2. Additional time to review discovery materials
  3. Modified court scheduling for medical appointments
  4. Technology assistance (MSI laptop to run AI locally, Westlaw access, speech-to-text software)
  5. Real-time transcription with hard copies for the defendant
  6. Copies of all transcripts from previous hearings
  7. Extended access to Odyssey system
  8. Written prosecution questions in advance
  9. Co-counsel funding for timely objections
  10. Regular breaks every 2 hours
  11. Expert witness funding (covering areas such as police corruption, child interviews, forensic medicine, biomechanical engineering, child psychology, and autism)
  12. Sufficient time to locate, interview, and prepare over thirty witnesses
  13. Emergency medical accommodations, including:
    1. Access to prescribed blood pressure medication
    2. Availability of blood pressure monitoring equipment
    3. Emergency transport arrangements to hospitals for hypertensive crises
Pattern of Arbitrary Denials
1. Despite clear and repeated requests substantiated by medical evidence, the Court summarily denied accommodation requests, especially additional time to prepare on June 9, 2025 and June 23, 2025, without individualized assessment, expert evaluation, or written justification as required by Washington General Rule 33(c)(4) and federal law under the ADAAA. This failure not only impairs the defendant’s ability to prepare an effective defense but also disrupts the fundamental fairness required in the judicial process.
Mathematical Impossibility of Adequate Preparation
1. Discovery Volume – The case involves 6,965 pages of discovery across 107 files totaling 215 MB, requiring approximately 269 hours (90 days) for single review at the defendant’s documented reading speed.
2. Time Constraints – With trial set for August 12, 2025, and only 18 days from July 26, 2025, defendant’s disability limits work capacity to 2-4 hours daily, providing maximum 36-72 hours over 18 days—less than a quarter of the minimum 269 hours required.
3. Professional Comparison – Two experienced attorneys working together were unable to complete preparation despite having over a year, demonstrating the manifest impossibility of the court’s demands.

LEGAL STANDARD FOR CrR 8.3(b) DISMISSAL
1. Two-Prong Test – Washington Criminal Rule 8.3(b) provides that “The court, in the furtherance of justice, after notice and hearing, may dismiss any criminal prosecution due to arbitrary action or governmental misconduct when there has been prejudice to the rights of the accused which materially affect the accused’s right to a fair trial.” State v. Michielli, 132 Wash.2d 229, 239-40, 937 P.2d 587 (1997).
2. Governmental Misconduct Standard – The Washington Supreme Court has clarified that governmental misconduct “need not be of an evil or dishonest nature; simple mismanagement is sufficient.” State v. Michielli, 132 Wash.2d 229, 240, 937 P.2d 587 (1997). A trial court’s decision is an abuse of discretion if it is “manifestly unreasonable, or is exercised on untenable grounds, or for untenable reasons.” State v. Blackwell, 120 Wash.2d 822, 830, 845 P.2d 1017 (1993).
FIRST AMENDMENT VIOLATIONS
1. Petition Clause – Right to Petition Government for Redress
  1. Constitutional Foundation – The First Amendment Petition Clause protects “the right of the people…to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” This right extends to all branches of government, including the courts. California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508, 510 (1972) (“Certainly the right to petition extends to all departments of the Government. The right of access to the courts is indeed but one aspect of the right of petition”).
  2. Court Proceedings as Petitioning Activity – Every aspect of defendant’s participation in this criminal case constitutes petitioning activity under the First Amendment: filing motions equals petitioning for specific relief; requesting accommodations equals petitioning for equal access; presenting evidence equals petitioning for fair consideration; cross-examining witnesses equals petitioning to challenge government evidence; making legal arguments equals petitioning for application of law in defendant’s favor.
  3. Structural Constitutional Violation Mandating Dismissal – The systematic denial of disability accommodations functionally prevents all meaningful petitioning activity by rendering the defendant unable to effectively engage in any essential trial functions. This constitutes a structural constitutional violation satisfying both prongs of CrR 8.3(b) because: (1) it constitutes arbitrary governmental action through violation of fundamental constitutional rights, and (2) it creates irreparable prejudice to fair trial rights that cannot be remedied through any means other than dismissal.
Washington Constitution Article I, Section 4 – Enhanced Protection
1. Right to Petition State Constitutional Guarantee – Washington Constitution Article I, Section 4 guarantees “the right of the people…to petition the government for redress of grievances.” The systematic denial of accommodation requests directly violates this constitutional mandate.
2. Mandatory Nature Under Article I, Section 29 – Washington Constitution Article I, Section 29 provides that “the provisions of this Constitution are mandatory.” The violation of petition rights cannot be excused as discretionary—it is a direct violation of mandatory constitutional provisions.
SIXTH AMENDMENT VIOLATIONS
1. Right to Self-Representation – Faretta Doctrine
  1. Constitutional Foundation – The Supreme Court in Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 835 (1975), held that the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to represent himself, but this waiver must be “made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently” with the record establishing “that he knows what he is doing and his choice is made with eyes open.”
  2. Adequate Preparation Time Required – The constitutional right to self-representation is meaningless without adequate preparation time. The Ninth Circuit established in United States v. Farias, 618 F.3d 1049, 1054 (9th Cir. 2010), that “a right to proceed pro se without adequate time to prepare renders that right ‘meaningless.’” Similarly, in Milton v. Morris, 767 F.2d 1443, 1446 (9th Cir. 1985), the court held that “the constitutional right of self-representation includes the right to have adequate time to prepare a defense.”
  3. Mathematical Impossibility Creates Invalid Waiver – The mathematical impossibility of adequate preparation renders any Faretta waiver constitutionally invalid. This creates a structural error requiring automatic relief. As established in United States v. Forrester, 512 F.3d 500, 506 (9th Cir. 2008), invalid Faretta waivers constitute structural error with “no harmless-error analysis.” The denial of meaningful self-representation due to impossible preparation requirements violates the Sixth Amendment and mandates dismissal.
2. The Right to Compulsory Process Constitutional Guarantee – The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant “compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor.” This right is meaningless without adequate time to identify, locate, and interview witnesses.
  1. U.S. Supreme Court Authority – In Washington v. Texas, 388 U.S. 14, 19 (1967), the Supreme Court established that “the right to offer the testimony of witnesses, and to compel their attendance, if necessary, is in plain terms the right to present a defense, the right to present the defendant’s version of the facts as well as the prosecution’s to the jury so it may decide where the truth lies.” The Court further declared that this right represents “a fundamental element of due process of law.”
  2. Washington Supreme Court Authority – In State v. Price, 94 Wn.2d 810, 814, 620 P.2d 994 (1980), the Washington Supreme Court established that prejudice under CrR 8.3(b) exists when the accused is denied “sufficient opportunity to adequately prepare a material part of his defense.”
  3. Violation Through Denial of Preparation Time – Defendant estimates over 30 witnesses need to be located and interviewed. The denial of adequate preparation time prevents the defendant from identifying, interviewing, and preparing witnesses, particularly complicated by the extensive time between 2017 when the alleged crimes were charged and today.
  4. Mandate for Dismissal – The Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process requires meaningful access to potential witnesses. The court’s arbitrary denial of adequate preparation time violates this fundamental right and requires dismissal under CrR 8.3(b).
3. Right to Be Informed of Nature and Cause of Accusation Constitutional Standard – The Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusations against them. When cognitive disabilities are present, this right requires that accommodations be made to ensure the defendant can fully comprehend the charges.
  1. Violation Through Inadequate Accommodation – Cognitive disabilities, especially the inability to remember spoken information long term, combined with rushed timeline prevent the defendant from understanding the nature and cause of accusation. The lack of adequate time and support violates the constitutional right to be informed, as the defendant cannot grasp or remember the essential facts and legal basis of the accusations.
  2. Due to the disability of being unable to remember spoken information long term the defendant absolutely needs copies of all transcripts, instant transcripts during trial and legal AI to sort and analyze those transcripts. This is Especially critical to defendant’s defense since based on a single note “effective counsel” that the defendant took he can show bias, lies and law violations by Judge Samuel that would mandate her recusal.
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT VIOLATIONS
1. Due Process Clause – Fundamental Fairness
  1. The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. This protection extends to ensuring meaningful participation in legal proceedings through the provision of necessary accommodations.
  2. Impact of Denial – The refusal to grant extended preparation times, technological aid, and real-time transcription prevents the defendant from engaging fully in the adversarial process, thereby undermining the fairness required for an effective defense.
  3. Appellate Authority and Citations – Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004) establishes that “[a]ccess to the courts is among the most fundamental rights secured by the Constitution.” Similarly, Washington precedent (State v. McCormick, 165 Wn.2d 212 (2008)) further underscores that impairing a defendant’s capacity to participate in proceedings is constitutionally impermissible.
2. Violation of the Fundamental Right to Access the Courts
  1. Constitutional Basis and Importance – The right to access the courts is inseparable from the due process guarantee and ensures that every litigant has the opportunity to be heard.
  2. Impact of Denial – By denying the defendant essential tools—such as assistive technology, extended review periods, and real-time transcription—state authorities have effectively obstructed access to justice, thereby nullifying the defendant’s right to a fair trial.
  3. Citations Supporting Required Access To The Courts For Disabled People
    1. Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004) expressly states that “[w]hen conditions essential to accessing the courts are inhibited, the defendant’s constitutional right is significantly impaired.”
    2. Justice Stevens, writing for the Court, further explained: “Recognizing that failure to accommodate persons with disabilities will often have the same practical effect as outright exclusion, Congress required the States to take reasonable measures to remove architectural and other barriers to accessibility… This duty to accommodate is perfectly consistent with the well-established due process principle that, within the limits of practicability, a State must afford to all individuals a meaningful opportunity to be heard in its courts.” Id. at 532–33.
3. Meaningful Access As Right To Be Heard
  1. Constitutional Standard for Meaningful Access – The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees fundamental fairness in all criminal proceedings. Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 379 (1971), established that “within the limits of practicability, a State must afford to all individuals a meaningful opportunity to be heard” in its courts.
  2. Supporting Citations
    1. Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 523 (2004) “The Due Process Clause also requires the States to afford certain civil litigants a ‘meaningful opportunity to be heard’ by removing obstacles to their full participation in judicial proceedings.”
    2. Mathews v. Eldridge Standard – As established in Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333 (1976), due process requires a “meaningful opportunity to be heard.” Denying necessary accommodations to a disabled defendant, coupled with inadequate preparation time, deprives the defendant of fundamental fairness by preventing meaningful participation in their defense.
    3. CJC 2.6 – The right to be heard is further supported by the Code of Judicial Conduct RULE 2.6 Ensuring the Right to Be Heard “A judge shall accord to every person who has a legal interest in a proceeding, or that person’s lawyer, the right to be heard according to law.”
      1. Comment [1] “The right to be heard is an essential component of a fair and impartial system of justice. Substantive rights of litigants can be protected only if procedures protecting the right to be heard are observed.”
    4. There’s also another example of Judge Samuel breaking the law as defined by the Code of Judicial Conduct!
4. Equal Protection Clause
  1. Constitutional Guarantee Against Disability Discrimination – The Equal Protection Clause prohibits discriminatory treatment by state actors and ensures that all individuals similarly situated are treated alike under the law. Creating disparate treatment based on disability status violates equal protection guarantees. Denying disabled individuals the accommodations necessary to fully participate in legal proceedings and the same access to justice and fair process afforded to others constitutes discrimination on the basis of disability.
  2. Impact of Denial – The state’s failure to provide even minimal accommodations results in a segregated and inherently unequal system that treats the defendant as less worthy of judicial benevolence compared to non-disabled litigants.
  3. ADA as Constitutional Protection – The Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 531 (2004), established that “Title II unquestionably is valid §5 legislation as it applies to the class of cases implicating the accessibility of judicial services” and that “the Due Process Clause protects the right of access to the courts” as a “fundamental right.”
  4. Citations Supporting Equal Protection As Required –
    1. Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581, 597 (1999) “Unjustified isolation, we hold, is properly regarded as discrimination based on disability.”
    2. Dunlap v. Liberty Natural Prod., Inc., 878 F.3d 794, 798 (9th Cir. 2017) “Discrimination on the basis of disability is contrary to the public policy of the United States, as reflected in the ADA’s broad mandate.”
    3. Head v. Glacier Nw., Inc., 413 F.3d 1053, 1064 (9th Cir. 2005) “The ADA is a remedial statute, enacted to eliminate discrimination against individuals with disabilities.”
    4. McClarty v. Totem Elec., 157 Wn.2d 214, 221, 137 P.3d 844 (2006), abrogated on other grounds by LAWS OF 2007, ch. 317 “The purpose of the WLAD [Washington Law Against Discrimination] is to prohibit discrimination… and to assure equality in the state of Washington for all persons.”
    5. State v. Green, 138 Wn.2d 657, 671, 980 P.2d 836 (1999) – “We interpret RCW 10.77.090(1) to require reasonable accommodation to ensure equal access to the courts for all persons with disabilities, as necessary to avoid denial of equal protection of the laws.”
    6. Wash. Rev. Code Ann. § 49.60.010 (WLAD – Statement of Purpose) “Discrimination threatens not only the rights and proper privileges of its inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic state.”
    7. Mandate for Dismissal – The systematic denial of disability accommodations creates presumptive equal protection violations that cannot be overcome and mandates dismissal under CrR 8.3(b).
Structural Constitutional Violation Mandating Dismissal
1. The denial of disability accommodations and constitutional rights creates structural violations that “corrupt the entire framework of the proceedings.” These violations cannot be remedied through ordinary measures and require dismissal to preserve constitutional protections.
2. Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45, 69 (1932). “The right to be heard would be, in many cases, of little avail if it did not comprehend the right to be heard by counsel. Even the intelligent and educated layman has small and sometimes no skill in the science of law. If charged with crime, he is incapable, generally, of determining for himself whether the indictment is good or bad. He is unfamiliar with the rules of evidence. Left without the aid of counsel he may be put on trial without a proper charge, and convicted upon incompetent evidence, or evidence irrelevant to the issue or otherwise inadmissible. He lacks both the skill and knowledge adequately to prepare his defense, even though he have a perfect one. He requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings against him. Without it, though he be not guilty, he faces the danger of conviction because he does not know how to establish his innocence.”
ADA TITLE II CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS
1. Constitutional Foundation Under Tennessee v. Lane Supreme Court Precedent – Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 531 (2004), established that ADA Title II provides constitutional protection for fundamental court access rights. The Court held that “Title II unquestionably is valid §5 legislation as it applies to the class of cases implicating the accessibility of judicial services” and that “the Due Process Clause protects the right of access to the courts” as a “fundamental right.”
2. Enhanced ADAAA Standards – The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) mandates that “the definition of disability…shall be construed in favor of broad coverage of individuals under the Act” and that “‘substantially limits’ is not meant to be a demanding standard.” The ADAAA establishes that “the primary object of attention in cases brought under title II of the ADA should be whether public entities have complied with their obligations and whether discrimination has occurred.”
3. Ninth Circuit Requirements for Individualized Assessment
  1. Duvall v. County of Kitsap Standard – The Ninth Circuit in Duvall v. County of Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124, 1138 (9th Cir. 2001), established that public entities have “a duty to gather sufficient information from the [disabled individual] and qualified experts as needed to determine what accommodations are necessary.” This places the burden on the public entity to obtain qualified expert assessment when needed.
  2. Violation of Federal Constitutional Law – The court’s systematic denial of ADAAA accommodations without proper justification constitutes a knowing violation of federal constitutional law. Judges are presumed to know the law, and continued violations after notice constitute deliberate misconduct requiring dismissal.
  3. Mandate for Dismissal – The systematic violation of ADA Title II constitutional protections satisfies both prongs of CrR 8.3(b) and mandates dismissal as the only remedy capable of vindicating constitutional rights.
WASHINGTON STATE CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATIONS
1. Article I, Section 3 – Due Process State Constitutional Guarantee
  1. Article I, Section 3 guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Denying accommodations essential for meaningful participation in legal proceedings effectively deprives a person of this fundamental right by obstructing their ability to understand, respond to, and defend against charges.
2. Article I, Section 10 – Administration of Justice Constitutional Requirement
  1. Article I, Section 10 guarantees that justice shall be administered “openly and without unnecessary delay.” The denial of necessary accommodations and adequate preparation time violates this provision by impeding the defendant’s ability to participate fully and fairly in their defense.
3. Article I, Section 12 – Equal Protection Enhanced State Protection
  1. Article I, Section 12 guarantees equal protection under the law. Denying disability accommodations and adequate time to prepare creates unequal treatment by placing disabled individuals at a significant disadvantage compared to others, violating the constitutional guarantee of equal protection.
4. Article I, Section 22 – Rights of Accused Comprehensive Rights Guarantee
  1. Article I, Section 22 guarantees the accused fundamental rights including the right to:
    1. Appear and defend in person,
    2. Have a speedy trial,
    3. Have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses.
  2. Denial of disability accommodations and adequate preparation time severely impairs all these rights by effectively excluding the accused from meaningful participation in their own defense.
WASHINGTON GENERAL RULE 33 VIOLATIONS
1. Statutory Mandate for Accommodations
2. Rule Requirements – Washington General Rule 33 requires that “Courts shall provide reasonable accommodations to persons with disabilities…to ensure that such persons have equal and meaningful access to the judicial system.” GR 33(a). The rule further mandates that “The court shall make its decision on an individual basis, considering the specific facts of each request.” GR 33(c)(2).
3. Written Decision Requirement – GR 33(c)(4) requires that “If the court denies a requested accommodation, the court must specify the reasons for the denial in writing.” The Court’s denial of accommodation requests without written justification violates this mandatory requirement.
4. Violation of Individual Assessment Requirement
  1. Case Law Supporting Individual Assessment – As established in the Disability Rights Washington amicus brief in Weems v. State Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals, courts must conduct individualized assessments based on current medical knowledge when making accommodation determinations. The Court’s blanket denials without proper evaluation violate this requirement.
5. Mandate for Dismissal – The systematic violation of Washington General Rule 33 constitutes governmental misconduct under CrR 8.3(b) and requires dismissal to preserve statutory protections and judicial integrity.
CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (CJC) VIOLATIONS
1. Definition of “Law” – WA CJC Terminology ¶ [2] (2022): “‘Law’ encompasses court rules, statutes, constitutional provisions, and decisional law.”
2. CANON 1 – “A JUDGE SHALL UPHOLD AND PROMOTE THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY, AND IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDICIARY, AND SHALL AVOID IMPROPRIETY AND THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY.”
  1. State v. Green, 176 Wn.2d 686, 695, 294 P.3d 1215 (2013) “Judicial integrity is the foundation of our legal system… When integrity is discredited, public trust and confidence in the judiciary and the legal system are eroded.”
3. Rule 1.1 – Compliance with Law Judicial Duty – Washington State Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 1.1 requires judges to “comply with the law.” As confirmed by the Washington Courts Ethics Advisory Opinion 23-05, “A judge shall comply with the law, including the Code of Judicial Conduct.” The documented pattern of denying statutorily mandated (ADA and CRR 8.3 B disability accommodations and violating established constitutional principles constitutes a knowing violation of law.
4. Rule 1.2 – Promoting Confidence in Judiciary Actual Improprieties – Washington State Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 1.2 mandates that judges “act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary.” Comment 2 states that “Actual improprieties include violations of law, court rules, or provisions of this Code.” The arbitrary denial of accommodations and preferential treatment of able-bodied litigants undermines impartiality and constitutes actual impropriety requiring disciplinary action.
5. Rule 2.2 – Fairness and Impartiality Fundamental Duty – Washington State Code of Judicial Conduct, Rule 2.2 requires judges to “uphold and apply the law, and perform all duties of judicial office fairly and impartially.” The systematic discrimination against a disabled pro se defendant violates this fundamental duty.
6. RULE 2.3 Bias, Prejudice, and Harassment –
  1. (A) A judge shall perform the duties of judicial office, including administrative duties, without bias or prejudice.
  2. (B) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, or engage in harassment, and shall not permit court staff, court officials, or others subject to the judge’s direction and control to do so.
  3. Comments
    1. [1] A judge who manifests bias or prejudice in a proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceeding and brings the judiciary into disrepute.
    2. [2] Examples of manifestations of bias or prejudice include but are not limited to epithets; slurs; demeaning nicknames; negative stereotyping; attempted humor based upon stereotypes; threatening, intimidating, or hostile acts; suggestions of connections between race, ethnicity, or nationality and crime; and irrelevant references to personal characteristics. Even facial expressions and body language can convey to parties and lawyers in the proceeding, jurors, the media, and others an appearance of bias or prejudice. A judge must avoid conduct that may reasonably be perceived as prejudiced or biased.
    3. [3] Harassment, as referred to in paragraphs (B) and (C), is verbal or physical conduct that denigrates or shows hostility or aversion toward a person on bases such as race, sex, gender, religion, national origin, ethnicity, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, socioeconomic status, or political affiliation.
    4. Judge Samuel Bias – Judge Samuel has not only harassed the defendant by denying him disability accommodations but has gone so far as to call him disingenuous in open court with no findings to back up that Derogatory slur!
Judicial Misconduct as Governmental Misconduct Under CrR 8.3(b)
1. Legal Standard – The pattern of Code violations constitutes serious judicial misconduct that satisfies the governmental misconduct prong of CrR 8.3(b). When judges knowingly violate law, this constitutes misconduct that corrupts the entire judicial process and mandates dismissal.
2. Definition and Ethical Mandate – The Code of Judicial Conduct mandates that judges must administer the law impartially and ensure that every litigant receives fair access to the judicial process. It defines the “law” as not only the letter of legal statutes but also the ethical obligations that sustain the integrity of the courtroom.
3. Breach by Arbitrary Judicial Action –
  1. Judicial Duty – Judges are required to provide an environment in which even the most vulnerable litigants can participate fully and effectively.
  2. Evidence of Violation – The consistent failure to grant the requested accommodations—essential for the defendant’s communication and case preparation—constitutes a clear breach of the Code Of Judicial Conducts mandate.
  3. Impact on the Fair Trial – This judicial inaction not only violates ethical standards but also directly compromises the defendant’s constitutional right to a fair trial.
CrR 8.3(b) ANALYSIS – FIRST PRONG: ARBITRARY GOVERNMENTAL ACTION OR MISCONDUCT
1. Statutory Basis – CRR 3.8(b) expressly requires that governmental action be free from arbitrariness when it affects the defendant’s right to a fair trial. The deliberate disregard in providing essential disability accommodations contravenes this statutory mandate.
2. Low Threshold for Misconduct Simple Mismanagement Standard Met – State v. Michielli, 132 Wash.2d at 240, established that governmental misconduct “need not be of an evil or dishonest nature; simple mismanagement is sufficient.” The systematic denial of federally mandated accommodations without proper justification easily meets this standard.
3. Impact of Denial and Arbitrary Action Due To Lack of Reasonable Accommodation – The state’s refusal to provide the accommodations listed under Section 2.5.1—despite unequivocal evidence of the defendant’s disabilities—illustrates an arbitrary and capricious application of judicial and administrative authority.
4. Systematic Violation of Federal Constitutional Law
  1. Multiple Legal Violations – The court’s conduct constitutes knowing violation of multiple federal and state laws: ADA Title II constitutional protections; Washington General Rule 33 statutory requirements; Due process requirements for meaningful court access; Equal protection guarantees against disability discrimination.
5. Mathematical Impossibility as Arbitrary Action
  1. Unreasonable Burden – The court has imposed preparation requirements that are mathematically impossible to meet given the defendant’s documented disabilities. This creates an impossible burden that no reasonable person could satisfy, constituting arbitrary governmental action.
6. Knowing Violation After Notice – Judges are presumed to know the law. The continued denial of accommodations after notice of defendant’s disabilities and legal requirements transforms error into deliberate misconduct satisfying the arbitrary action prong.
7. Criminal Misconduct Under 18 U.S.C. § 242 Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
  1. Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section, or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
    1. Court and State Federal Criminal Liability – By knowingly and willingly engaging in the denial of defendants disability accommodations and the violation of his constitutional rights the court and the state have engaged in criminal acts at the federal level and will be charged as such by the defendant.
    2. The Silent Death Penalty – The Silent Death Penalty is when agents of Washington State commit crimes against, abuse, torture, attempt to murder and murder detained LOW INCOME, MINORITY, LGBTQI+, ELDERLY AND DISABLED PEOPLE without having to answer for their crimes, abuse, torture and murder!
    3. Death Sentence For Judge Samuel and State – The defendant is legally innocent but may get convicted because of the denial of his disability accommodations. No jail or prison in Washington is designed to support the defendants disabilities, especially his high blood pressure therefore it is absolute that the defendant will face further crimes against him – abuse, torture, attempt to murder and murder by the timely denial of prescribed medications and necessary testing. This could realistically result in death And that both judge Samuel and the prosecutor could also face a death sentence under 18 USC 242!
CrR 8.3(b) ANALYSIS – SECOND PRONG: PREJUDICE TO FAIR TRIAL RIGHTS
1. Structural Constitutional Violations Create Presumptive Prejudice Based On Framework Corruption – The denial of disability accommodations creates structural violations that “corrupt the entire framework of the proceedings.” Unlike trial errors that can be corrected, these violations affect the entire framework of the trial and “typically entitle the defendant to a new trial without any showing of prejudice.” Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 309-310 (1991). However in the defendant’s case these violations were done openly and knowingly and with full knowledge that they resulted in anxiety and emotional torture, possible death to the defendant and suicidal ideation. Therefore, they meet the standard for dismissal under CRR 8.3 B dismissal and other dismissal options. Washington state should not be allowed to abuse and torture people who are legally innocent especially since the death penalty has been eliminated.
2. Sixth Amendment Precedent Due To Denial of Meaningful Self-Representation – Under Sixth Amendment precedent, the denial of adequate preparation time and necessary accommodations renders self-representation meaningless, violating constitutional guarantees and creating presumptive structural prejudice.
3. Due Process Violation Due To Impossibility of Adequate Defense – The documented cognitive disabilities, combined with voluminous discovery and inadequate time, create an impossible situation where meaningful defense preparation cannot occur, violating due process guarantees and satisfying the prejudice prong.
4. Right to Adequate Preparation Under State v. Michielli Prejudice Standard – State v. Michielli, 132 Wash.2d at 240, establishes that prejudice under CrR 8.3(b) includes “the right to be represented by counsel who has had sufficient opportunity to adequately prepare a material part of his defense.” For a pro se defendant, this translates to the right to adequate time and accommodations to prepare his own defense.
DISMISSAL IS THE ONLY ADEQUATE REMEDY
1. Structural Nature Precludes Lesser Remedies As Framework Defects Cannot Be Cured – Because the constitutional violations are structural, affecting the entire framework of the proceedings, no remedy short of dismissal can vindicate the defendant’s constitutional rights. Continuance cannot cure past denials of constitutional rights that have already occurred and corrupted the proceedings.
2. Deterrent Effect Required For Preservation of Constitutional Rights – Only dismissal adequately deters future violations of disabled defendants’ petition rights and maintains public confidence in constitutional protections. The integrity of Washington’s criminal justice system requires dismissal to vindicate constitutional principles.
3. United States v. Hasting Four Factors Supporting Dismissal Based On Supervisory Power – United States v. Hasting, 461 U.S. 499, 505-507 (1983), established that supervisory power serves to: (1) implement remedies for violation of recognized rights; (2) preserve judicial integrity by ensuring convictions rest on appropriate considerations; (3) deter illegal conduct; and (4) maintain control over court proceedings. All four factors support dismissal in the defendant’s case.
RELIEF REQUESTED
1. Motion for Dismissal with Prejudice – WHEREFORE, In light of these incontrovertible legal and ethical failings, the defendant respectfully requests that:
  1. The Court GRANT this Motion to Dismiss all charges with prejudice under CrR 8.3(b), supervisory power and constitutional grounds, and
  2. Issue an order affirming that the state’s systematic failure to provide necessary disability accommodations constitutes an irreparable violation of the defendant’s rights.
2. Findings of Constitutional Violations – FIND that the systematic denial of ADAAA accommodations violates federal constitutional protections and creates structural defects requiring dismissal; FIND that the pattern of governmental misconduct satisfies both prongs of CrR 8.3(b); FIND that the inadequate preparation time, combined with accommodation denials, creates irreparable prejudice that cannot be cured by continuance.
3. Additional Relief – AWARD such other relief as justice requires to vindicate constitutional principles and deter future governmental misconduct.
CONCLUSION
1. Summary of Violations – The state’s persistent denial of essential disability accommodations has resulted in severe violations of (a) the Due Process Clause (by impeding the defendant’s ability to prepare and present an effective defense), (b) the Equal Protection Clause (by discriminating on the basis of disability), (c) the fundamental right to access the courts and (d) many other constitutional rights. In addition, the arbitrary actions at issue violate both the Code of Judicial Conduct and the statutory requirements under CRR 3.8(b).
2. Constitutional Imperative for Dismissal – As stated in State v. Cory, 62 Wn.2d 371, 378, 382 P.2d 1019 (1963), “It is morally incongruous for the state to flout constitutional rights and at the same time demand that its citizens observe the law.” The pattern of governmental misconduct documented in this case creates multiple grounds for dismissal that cannot be remedied through ordinary measures.
3. Preservation of Judicial Integrity – The integrity of Washington’s criminal justice system requires dismissal with prejudice to vindicate constitutional principles, preserve judicial integrity, and deter future violations against disabled defendants. Justice and the furtherance of constitutional principles require dismissal of all charges.
4. Mandate for Dismissal – Given the cumulative constitutional and ethical violations—stemming from the judges and state’s arbitrary misconduct—the only just and legally tenable remedy is the immediate dismissal of these proceedings with prejudice. This relief is warranted to restore the integrity of the judicial process and to prevent ongoing discrimination.
5. Final Affirmation – The detailed legal analysis and binding precedents leave no alternative conclusion but that dismissal with prejudice is compelled by both constitutional mandates and ethical imperatives, especially under supervisory power. Accordingly, granting this motion is the sole remedy that fully redresses the significant injustices suffered by the defendant.

OUTRAGEOUS GOVERNMENTAL MISCONDUCT MANDATING DISMISSAL

Legal Standard for Outrageous Governmental Misconduct
1. Constitutional Foundation – The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment prohibits governmental conduct “so outrageous that due process principles would absolutely bar the government from invoking judicial processes to obtain a conviction.” State v. Lively, 130 Wn.2d 1, 19, 921 P.2d 1035 (1996) (quoting United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423, 431-32 (1973)).
2. Washington State Standard – Under Washington law, outrageous governmental conduct occurs when state actions “shock the universal sense of fairness” and “violate fundamental fairness.” State v. Lively, 130 Wn.2d at 19-20. The conduct must be evaluated based on the “totality of the circumstances” to determine whether it reaches the constitutional threshold requiring dismissal.
3. Ninth Circuit Authority – The Ninth Circuit in, United States v. Chapman, 524 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir. 2008), established that governmental conduct must be “grossly shocking and so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice” to warrant dismissal. The court emphasized that such conduct “substantially prejudices” the defendant’s fundamental rights.
4. Pattern of Outrageous Conduct by State Actors Through Systematic Violation of Federal Constitutional Law – The State’s conduct constitutes a deliberate pattern of constitutional violations that shocks the conscience:
  1. Knowing Violation of ADA Title II: Systematic denial of federally mandated accommodations despite clear legal requirements under Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509 (2004)
  2. Deliberate Discrimination Against Disabled Individual: Targeting a vulnerable, disabled pro se defendant for disadvantageous treatment
  3. Creating Impossible Conditions: Imposing mathematically impossible preparation requirements while denying necessary accommodations
Judicial Misconduct Rising to Constitutional Violation
1. Judge Samuel’s conduct demonstrates a pattern of bias and misconduct that violates due process:
2. Calling Defendant “Disingenuous” Without Factual Basis: Public disparagement of disabled defendant in open court
3. Arbitrary Denial of Statutory Rights: Refusing to comply with Washington General Rule 33 requirements
4. Violation of Code of Judicial Conduct: Systematic breach of Rules 1.1, 1.2, 2.2, and 2.3
Prosecutorial Participation in Constitutional Violations
1. The prosecution’s complicity in denying constitutionally mandated accommodations constitutes outrageous conduct paralleling the Brady violations in Chapman, where prosecutors systematically withheld discovery and made affirmative misrepresentations to the court.
Totality of Circumstances Analysis
1. Vulnerability of the Defendant
2. Similar to State v. Lively, where the court found outrageous conduct in targeting a vulnerable recovering addict, here the State has targeted a severely disabled individual:
3. Multiple Documented Disabilities: Cognitive, physical, and mental health impairments
4. Mathematical Impossibility of Defense: 6,965 pages requiring 269 hours with only 72 hours available
5. Federal Recognition of Total Disability: SSI determination of complete inability to work
Shocking Nature of Government’s Actions
1. The government’s conduct shocks the universal sense of justice by:
  1. Deliberate Torture Through Denial: Creating anxiety, suicidal ideation, and medical emergencies
  2. Silent Death Penalty: Knowing that conviction will lead to medical neglect and potential death in custody
  3. Criminal Liability Under 18 U.S.C. § 242: Actions constitute federal crimes of deprivation of rights under color of law
Systemic Pattern of Abuse
1. Unlike isolated misconduct, this represents a coordinated governmental assault on constitutional rights:
2. Judicial Branch: Systematic denial of accommodations and due process
3. Executive Branch: Prosecutorial refusal to acknowledge federal law requirements
4. Administrative: Court staff participation in denial of equal access
Application of Chapman and Lively Standards
1. Chapman Factors Present
2. Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 23–24 (1967) (“There are some constitutional rights so basic to a fair trial that their infraction can never be treated as harmless error…. The State bears the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the error complained of did not contribute to the verdict obtained.”)
3. The conduct meets all Chapman criteria for dismissal:
  1. Flagrant Government Misconduct & Willful/Bad Faith Actions – Chapman recognizes that constitutional rights are so fundamental that the willful deprivation of those rights goes to the heart of the fairness of the proceeding. Flagrant, willful (not accidental) violations demonstrate that any error was neither innocuous nor subject to “cure” and thus is not harmless. If, for example, the government systematically and knowingly violates constitutional provisions after being put on notice, Chapman’s burden shifts to the State to prove harmlessness—a burden unlikely to be met in the face of such conduct.
  2. Willful and Bad Faith Actions – Chapman’s harmless error rule turns on whether the court can declare the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. When governmental misconduct causes prejudice so deep that no ordinary remedy can correct it (for example, the proceeding’s fairness is fundamentally undermined), then there is, by definition, reasonable doubt about harmlessness. Chapman thus compels reversal—and, where retrial would perpetuate the unfairness or prejudice cannot be undone, dismissal may be the only adequate remedy.
  3. Substantial Prejudice – Chapman explicitly holds that some rights are “so basic to a fair trial that their infraction can never be treated as harmless error.” This includes core rights like due process, equal protection, and the Sixth Amendment. Where government actions subvert these rights, the error is “structural,” infects the trial “from beginning to end,” and cannot be salvaged by post hoc review—thus, reversal or even dismissal is required to vindicate constitutional principles.
  4. Subversion of Constitutional Rights: Due process, equal protection, and Sixth Amendment violations – As shown in sections 6-9 above.
  5. Irreparable Nature of Harm:
  6. Unlike Chapman’s Brady violations that could theoretically be cured by retrial, the constitutional violations here are structural and irreparable:
    1. Dignity Violations: Public disparagement and discrimination cannot be undone
    2. Psychological Trauma: Anxiety, suicidal ideation, and emotional torture cannot be undone And have to increase the defendants BPD and PTS to the point that he is having suicidal ideations.
    3. Constitutional Framework Corruption: Entire proceedings infected by discrimination.
  7. Denial of the presumption of innocence:
    1. Judge Samuels consistently uses the term “VICTIMS” to describe AD and PD thereby showing extreme bias and prejudice. She also represented that I was an extreme danger to the public to try to prevent me from gaining pretrial release.
      1. My previous attorney and the former prosecuting attorney had to step in to allow me pretrial release.
    2. RCW 10.58.020 states: “Every person charged with the commission of a crime shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved by competent evidence beyond a reasonable doubt…”.
    3. RCW 9A.04.100 likewise provides: “Every person charged with the commission of a crime is presumed innocent unless proved guilty. No person may be convicted of a crime unless each element of the crime is proved by competent evidence beyond a reasonable doubt”
    4. The requirement to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt arises from federal constitutional due process, as established in In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364 (1970), and is firmly embedded in Washington law
Lively Factors Present

“The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment requires dismissal of criminal charges where law enforcement conduct is so outrageous as to offend the universal sense of fairness.” – State v. Lively, 130 Wn.2d 1, 19, 921 P.2d 1035 (1996).

The conduct parallels and exceeds the outrageous conduct found in Lively:
Life-Threatening Consequences: Potential death sentence through medical neglect by jails and prisons which already resulted in three severe strokes leaving the defendant severely disabled.
Targeting Vulnerable Individual: Disabled defendant versus recovering addict. The State’s and the judiciary’s persistent denial of critical disability accommodations targeted a criminally accused pro se litigant known to be suffering from severe neurocognitive and physical disabilities, as verified by federal and state disability determinations and uncontroverted medical evidence (see, e.g., Barnhart v. Thomas, 540 U.S. 20, 23 (2003); see also State v. Green, 138 Wn.2d 657, 671, 980 P.2d 836 (1999)). The conduct is even more egregious because it repeatedly and knowingly attacked protected vulnerabilities while the defendant was under the care and control of the state itself.
Manipulation of System: Using court process to discriminate rather than provide justice: The State’s and the judiciary’s persistent denial of critical disability accommodations targeted a criminally accused pro se litigant known to be suffering from severe neurocognitive and physical disabilities, as verified by federal and state disability determinations and uncontroverted medical evidence (see, e.g., Barnhart v. Thomas, 540 U.S. 20, 23 (2003); see also State v. Green, 138 Wn.2d 657, 671, 980 P.2d 836 (1999)). The conduct is even more egregious because it repeatedly and knowingly attacked protected vulnerabilities while the defendant was under the care and control of the state itself.
Government-Created Impossible Conditions for Defense: In Lively, the government’s outrageous conduct involved inducement and unfair manipulation of the process. Here, the government did not merely manipulate, but entirely foreclosed the ability to prepare any meaningful defense by imposing mathematically impossible timelines on a disabled, self-represented defendant, recognizing that two trained attorneys with full faculties could not prepare adequately under the same circumstances.
As the Ninth Circuit has explained in United States v. Chapman, 524 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir. 2008), “Government conduct that is ‘grossly shocking and so outrageous as to violate the universal sense of justice’ compels dismissal.”
Systematically denying required ADA accommodations under these conditions drastically exceeds even the police conduct in Lively, because it denies not just statutory rights, but multiple overlapping constitutional guarantees including due process, equal protection, and access to the courts (Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 523 (2004)).
Persistent, Institutional Disregard of Constitutional and Statutory Mandates
1. In Lively, the wrongdoing arose from individual officers’ actions. Here, the misconduct emanates from all branches—judicial, prosecutorial, and administrative—persistently ignoring express statutory duties imposed under Title II of the ADA (42 U.S.C. § 12132; see Duvall v. County of Kitsap, 260 F.3d 1124, 1136–40 (9th Cir. 2001)), as well as ethical mandates imposed by the Washington Code of Judicial Conduct.
2. The Washington Supreme Court and federal courts have made clear: “Governmental misconduct need not be of an evil or dishonest nature; simple mismanagement is sufficient.” State v. Michielli, 132 Wn.2d 229, 240, 937 P.2d 587 (1997).
3. But here, the level of disregard and knowledge brings the conduct well past simple mismanagement into the realm of willful, bad faith violations akin to—or worse than—those in Lively.
Creation of a Structurally Unfair Playing Field
1. The Supreme Court has defined structural error as a defect that “affects the framework within which the trial proceeds, rather than simply an error in the trial process itself.” Arizona v. Fulminante, 499 U.S. 279, 310 (1991).
2. Where, as here, outrageous governmental misconduct denies a disabled pro se defendant the “basic tools of an adequate defense” (Ake v. Oklahoma, 470 U.S. 68, 77 (1985)), and makes adequate preparation logistically and cognitively impossible, the trial process is not merely tainted but fundamentally corrupted.
Outrages of this magnitude, touching every stage of the defense and removing any realistic possibility for a fair trial, demand the extraordinary remedy of dismissal. (See also State v. Cory, 62 Wn.2d 371, 378, 382 P.2d 1019 (1963) (“shocking and unpardonable conduct” that “vitiates the whole proceeding” requires dismissal of all charges)).
The systematic denial of disability accommodations has created multiple, simultaneous constitutional violations that constitute structural error requiring dismissal under CrR 8.3(b). Following State v. Cory’s precedent, when constitutional violations “vitiate the whole proceeding” and create prejudice that cannot be isolated or remedied, dismissal is the only adequate remedy to preserve constitutional protections and judicial integrity.

Cumulative Constitutional Harm Theory – The legal concept of “cumulative constitutional harm” provides a strong foundation for dismissal when multiple constitutional rights are violated simultaneously. As established in scholarly analysis of cumulative constitutional rights, multiple constitutional violations can create aggregate harm that, taken together, rises to the level requiring dismissal even when individual violations might not. The Duke Law Review article on “Cumulative Constitutional Rights” explains that “multiple discrete acts, taken together, add up to a harm of constitutional magnitude, even if each individual act, taken alone, would not”.
State v. Cory: Washington’s Dismissal Precedent for Constitutional Violations
1. As stated in State v. Cory, 62 Wn.2d 371, 378 (1963), “It is morally incongruous for the state to flout constitutional rights and at the same time demand that its citizens observe the law.”
2. State v. Cory, 62 Wn.2d 371, 382 P.2d 1019 (1963) provides the foundational Washington precedent for dismissal based on constitutional violations. The Washington Supreme Court held that when constitutional violations “vitiate the whole proceeding,” dismissal is the only adequate remedy. The court stated:
3. “It is our conclusion that the defendant is correct when he says that the shocking and unpardonable conduct of the sheriff’s officers, in eavesdropping upon the private consultations between the defendant and his attorney, and thus depriving him of his right to effective counsel, vitiates the whole proceeding. The judgment and sentence must be set aside and the charges dismissed.”
4. Critically, the Cory court explained: “We do not appreciate the logic of this conclusion [that a new trial would be sufficient]. There is no way to isolate the prejudice resulting from an eavesdropping activity, such as this. If the prosecution gained information which aided it in the preparation of its case, that information would be as available in the second trial as in the first.”
Summary – In summary, the government’s conduct here not only “shocks the universal sense of justice” (Lively, 130 Wn.2d at 19) but also inflicts deeper and broader harm than in Lively, because it systemically and knowingly deprives a severely disabled person of the very mechanisms for defense, in flagrant disregard of controlling constitutional, statutory, and ethical mandates. This conduct not merely parallels but exceeds the misconduct in Lively, and under controlling law, only dismissal can cure the profound and irremediable prejudice caused.

Respectfully submitted,

Date: 7/28/2025

CIVIL RIGHTS