Sexual Offenses

An accusation of sexual misconduct alone can affect a person’s reputation and livelihood, but the stain of accusation can pale in significance to the consequences of a sex conviction.  In addition to the unique stigma that follows conviction for a sex offense, many sex offenses carry the possibility of a life sentence, even for a first-time offender.  After an offender pays his debt to society, he must wear the modern-day scarlet letter that is sex offender registration and be subject to the whims of local law enforcement, which has virtually unfettered discretion to assign the level of sex offender registration that will determine whether he can live more or less anonymously or be subject to public shaming via internet posting and community notification.  With so much at stake, it is crucial that you have a skilled and experienced advocate on your side.

Sex offense prosecution poses a list of unique issues that require the expertise of an experienced defense lawyer.  When a child is the alleged victim, it can be a challenge to cut through the emotions involved and get to the truth.  A skilled attorney can challenge the reliability of a child’s accusation and its vulnerability to suggestion by trusted adults, such as a parent who may be motivated by a custody dispute or a professional child interviewer who may introduce or reinforce information not previously known to the child.  A defense attorney must be prepared to challenge the admission of “child hearsay” that Washington law sometimes allows in lieu of live testimony.   DNA and other forensic evidence can play a key role in sex offense prosecutions, and an experienced defense lawyer can separate the junk from the science.

Seattle criminal defense lawyer David Hammerstad has years of experience defending against the most serious sex offense allegations, obtaining multiple acquittals and pretrial resolutions that have avoided the harshest consequences of conviction.


  • Dismissal. Rape in the Second Degree
    State of Washington v. SL.  Prosecution dismissed charge after our investigation revealed consent defense.
  • Misdemeanor reduction.  Child Molestation in the First Degree.
    State of Washington v. R.H.  Jury hung, 11-1 to acquit, after trial.  State offered misdemeanor reduction rather than retry case.
  • Not Guilty.  Indecent Liberties.
    State of Washington v. V.D.  I was able to persuade the jury that my client was falsely accused based on a personal vendetta.
  • Not Guilty.  Burglary with Sexual Motivation.
    State of Washington v. A.J.  I was able to persuade jury that entry into neighbor’s apartment was done with consent and without criminal intent.  
  • Misdemeanor Reduction.  Child Molestation in the First Degree.
    State of Washington v. T.G.  I litigated child competency during pretrial hearings, eliminating a witness against my client.  On the eve of jury selection the State offered my client a plea to a misdemeanor charge and he served no time in jail.
  • Dismissal.  Aggravated Felonious Sexual Assault.
    State of NH v. SH.  I was able to persuade the prosecution to dismiss charges after our investigation revealed that the alleged assault could not have happened on the date and place alleged.
  • Misdemeanor Reduction.  Promoting Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor.
    State of NH v. TB.  I was able to persuade the prosecution that client had limited knowledge of and involvement in activities of associate.
  • Dismissal.  Petition for Involuntary Civil Commitment.
    In Re the Detention of W.D.  I won the dismissal of “sexually violent predator” petition on eve of trial after conducting depositions that persuaded the State not to go forward.

Request a Consultation

Vacating and Expunging Sentences

Vacating & Expunging Records

A conviction doesn’t necessarily mean a permanent scar on your record. Find out how you can clear your name and move on. Learn More >

Recent Blog Articles

State v. Mayer: A Cop’s Misleading Explanation of Miranda

In a case where the defendant, Nicholas Mayer, was accused and convicted of ten criminal counts after robbing a teriyaki restaurant at gunpoint, the Washington State Supreme Court had to decide whether Mayer adequately waived his Miranda rights (derived from the Fifth Amendment), and furthermore, whether that improper Miranda would have mattered when the evidence was stacked against the defendant.

After robbing…