Will Co-Defendants Also Be Charged With Firearm Enhancement?

Ray Hrdlicka – Host – Attorneys.Media

“That actually begs my next question. Co-defendants are involved in the case. One has a gun. Are they all charged with firearm enhancement?”

Spencer Freeman – Criminal Defense Attorney – Pierce County, WA

“It’s a good question. I think it depends upon the circumstances. I have handled a case where a boyfriend and a girlfriend were living together. One of the two was dealing marijuana. The other one, maybe helped out here and there. A warrant was executed. There was a gun found in the house and they were both charged with the gun enhancement in that situation. I think it would be significantly different if somebody, let’s say, had it in their pocket or stuck in the waistband of their pants. A co-conspirator or a co-defendant probably wouldn’t, at that point, be charged with a firearm enhancement.”

Ray Hrdlicka – Host – Attorneys.Media

“All right, so let’s say, in the case of a robbery, or a car-jacking, and one of them has a weapon, that’s where one of them may not…”

Spencer Freeman – Criminal Defense Attorney – Pierce County, WA

“I think that when you are talking about a robbery, and you’re talking about multiple defendants engaged in the robbery, and only one of the defendants has a firearm, I think in that scenario, all of them may be charged with a firearm enhancement. You would have to litigate whether the other defendants had enough ready access to the firearm to be charged with it. But remember, when you are talking about, essentially a conspiracy like that, you are liable for, as one defendant, for the actions of the other defendants. Let’s say, in that scenario, the gentleman with the gun shot and killed somebody, the others helping out with the robbery can be charged with first-degree felony murder, even though they didn’t pull the trigger.”

Born and raised in Colorado, Mr. Freeman stayed in the Pacific Northwest after graduating cum laude from Seattle University School of Law in 1995, at which time he was awarded the National Order of Barristers by the National Board of Governors. After gaining extensive trial experience as a prosecutor for the City of Tacoma, Mr. Freeman worked locally for several small law firms focused on personal injury and criminal defense. In 2000, he began to work at a downtown Seattle law firm, where he worked with some of the best lawyers in the nation. During the better part of the next six years, Mr. Freeman was blessed to do work for one of the largest national television providers litigating matters involving the theft of encrypted satellite signals. During this time, he worked closely with corporate counsel and assisted in developing and managing a national litigation campaign. He appeared in federal courts throughout the nation, gaining extensive experience in both federal court litigation and the pursuit of intellectual property thieves attempting to hide on the Internet.

In late 2005, Mr. Freeman decided to open a practice in Tacoma, where his family was growing. Mr. Freeman’s connections locally and nationally nourished his practice over time. He has served the local community as well as handling cases in federal courts across the country. Locally, Mr. Freeman has assisted local businesses in such matters as contentious shareholder disputes and individuals in matters ranging from catastrophic injuries to class A felonies as well as lawsuits against insurance companies for bad faith claims practices. He tried a Whatcom County Superior Court case for a bail bond company that resulted in the first appellate law in Washington truly outlining the rights of fugitive recovery agents. He has tried cases in many counties throughout the State of Washington, argued before the Court of Appeals Division I and Division II and the Washington State Supreme Court.

Mr. Freeman’s practice has taken him beyond Washington State, where he has handled cases for national Internet multi-media companies enforcing copyrights in states such as Florida, Nevada, Arizona, and California. In those cases, he has successfully argued for jurisdiction in the United States against individuals that reside in other countries. Mr. Freeman also represented a publisher against sheriffs regarding First Amendment Rights to distribute a magazine in county jails, resulting in arguments before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the first case law of its kind. He has argued before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals five times and submitted a briefing to the United States Supreme Court.

On more than several occasions, Mr. Freeman has been retained by parties on the near eve of a trial solely for purpose of being lead trial counsel. One such successful case was against the U.S. Department of Justice in their first trial attempting to enforce the CAN-SPAM Act for the actions of independent contractors.

Mr. Freeman’s passion and strength lay in front of a jury. He finds a beautiful balance between fact witnesses, statutes, case law, rules of evidence, and the different contexts of each jury. Most cases find a resolution before trial, but the best resolution occurs when counsel is prepared to try the case. And, when a case cannot find resolution, Mr. Freeman loves to go to work.