KCLL Klues: Washington State Legal Research

Launched May 16, 2009, Wolfram|Alpha is one of latest online search engines. Wolfram Alpha is a computational knowledge engine capable of natural language processing, developed by Wolfram Research, a software company. It runs its calculations using Mathematica, an earlier product developed by Wolfram Research.

Wolfram|Alpha and Wolfram Research are the design of Stephen Wolfram. London-born Wolfram is a physicist, software developer, mathematician, inventor, computer programmer, author, businessman and all-around genius. His goal in the development of this site is “bring[ing] expert-level knowledge and capabilities to the broadest possible range of people—spanning all professions and education levels.”

Wolfram|Alpha accepts “free-form input” and produces clear and comprehensible results. Instead of producing a results list like other online search sites, Wolfram|Alpha uses its “10+ trillion pieces of data, 50,000+ types of algorithms and models, and linguistic capabilities for 1000+ domains” to try to compute answers to presented queries. When it is unable to calculate an answer, it states: “Wolfram|Alpha isn’t sure how to compute an answer from your input”.

Wolfram|Alpha can solve mathematical problems with ease. It can provide statistical information on a variety of topics with numbers, charts and graphs. And, Wolfram Alpha has a sense of humor, quoting both Monty Python and The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy in response to relevant questions.

Despite all of this goodness, there are still deficits in Wolfram|Alpha’s knowledge. When I ran a computation of my family home in North Carolina, it gave me information on a city with the same name in Oregon as well as information on the state of North Carolina. However, I anticipate that as the core of information contained in Wolfram|Alpha’s databases increase, flubs such as this will happen less and less. And despite these quirks, it’s a lot of fun to play with!

For optimal computation, Wolfram|Alpha requires an up-to-date web browser to run its calculations.

Click on the following links for more information on Wolfram|Alpha or Stephen Wolfram.

In a recent story on National Public Radio, a speaker discussed the results of comparing search engines Bing and Google.  He used a program called Bing-vs-Google.  After a week of searching for an article he was preparing, he thought there were gaps in the Bing results, but that Bing may offer more opportunities for shopping online.  You can run your own test.  Enter your search terms in the search box.  The default display shows the results side-by-side or you can show the results horizontally.  Give it a try.

Due to staffing needs, the King County Law Library Kent branch at the Maleng Regional Justice Center will be CLOSED on Thursday, December 24th.  The Seattle library will be open regular hours (8am to 5pm). 

There is NOT be a drop box available at the MRJC library – you must return materials during business hours.  If you have library materials that are stamped due on December 24th, please let a library staff member know when you return them and you will be credited for that day. 

Both libraries will be closed on Friday, December 25th.

Call the Library at 206-296-0940 today for a free two-part class about E-Filing in the King County Superior Court! 

Part 1:
Wednesday, January 13^th                                    12:15 pm-1:00 pm
Wednesday, January 20^th                                     5:15-6:00 pm

Part 2:
Friday, January 15^th                                              12:15 pm-1:00 pm
Friday, January 22^nd                                               5:15-6:00 pm

Part One
Navigating around the E-Filing site
Setting up an account
Beginning a new case

Part Two
Adding files to an existing case
Technical issues concerning document preparation
Troubleshooting

Following each 45-minute session, there will be 15 minutes for optional hands-on practice and questions.  All class  sessions will be held at the Seattle Library.

The Florida Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee issued an opinion last month stating that it would violate the Code of Judicial Conduct  for a judge to “add lawyers who may appear before the judge as ‘friends’ on a social networking site, and permit such lawyers to add the judge as their ‘friend’.”  You can read the opinion here.

I was curious to see if the Washington Courts or the Washington State Bar Association has issued any opinions on this topic.  I searched the Judicial Ethics Opinions from the Ethics Advisory Committee for the State of Washington but did not see that Washington has issued an ethics opinion that is similiar to the one from Florida.  I did find an opinion addressing the question of whether or not a judge could maintain a internet blog (Opinion 09-05).  The short answer is yes, with the proper disclaimers.

I also searched the WSBA Ethics Opinions but didn’t find anything that matched.  Nonetheless, it’s still probably not a good idea to ‘friend’ your favorite judge.

Anyone who has ever tried to find appellate case law on traffic infractions will quickly realize that few traffic infraction cases are appealed to the Court of Appeals and even fewer to the Washington Supreme Court.  The attorney fees alone would be significantly more than the initial ticket. 

Such was not the case for Seattle attorney Andy Magee.  In 2005, Mr. Magee helped out a friend who needed a jump start on an on-ramp on Highway 520 and positioned his vehicle so that it was nose-to-nose with the other car on the shoulder.  Mr. Magee was given a ticket for Negligent Driving the Second Degree – a moving violation found at RCW 46.61.525.   IRLJ 2.2(b)(1) notes that “[t]he infraction need not have been committed in the officers presence, except as provided by statute”.  The statute in question is RCW 46.63.030  – it gives reasons when a law enforcement officer has the authority to issue a notice of traffic infraction: “If an officer investigating at the scene of a motor vehicle accident has reasonable cause to believe that the driver of a motor vehicle involved in the accident has committed a traffic infraction”.

Mr. Magee argued that because the trooper had not witnessed the alleged violation (driving the wrong way on the highway) he should not have been given the ticket.  He was unsuccessful at his hearing in District Court.  The judgment was confirmed on RALJ appeal in Pierce County Superior Court.  The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment as well (143 Wn. App. 698 – look on www.legalwa.org for the opinion). 

On December 3, 2009,  Supreme Court ruled that, because negligent driving is a moving infraction and Magee’s driving happened before the trooper arrived, ”the trooper did not have authority to issue the notice of infraction”. 

 The unanimous  opinion is available at the Washington Court’s website for the next 90 days.  After that time, it will be available only on the www.legalwa.org website.

For further research on this topic, there is the two-volume set  Washington Criminal Practice in Courts of Limited Jurisdiction by Linda Portnoy (available at the reference desk).  Also, the briefs from the Supreme Court case are available here.

If you’re trying to locate someone you believe is incarcerated, start your search with the following:

Department of Corrections Offenders site: Use this link to search for individuals by name or DOC number.  The site is updated nightly and lists a contact phone numbers for both in-state and out-of-state offenders.

King County Jail Inmate Lookup Service: Use this link to search for individuals held specifically in King County facilities.

Washington Statewide Automated Victim Information and Notification: Use this link to search for individuals incarcerated state-wide and to register to be notified when they are released, transferred or escape.