My question involves traffic court in the State of: Washington
I received discovery, and the officer has two places where he should've signed. I'm not sure that either meets the requirements of RCW 9A.72.085 to be a valid signature (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.72.085). I think the issue may come down to whether the officer entering his user ID and password qualifies as a digital signature under RCW 19.34.020(11) (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=19.34.020). I don't see a King County District Court local rule that governs a digital signature.
Would you please let me know what you think?
Also, here's the discovery and if you have any other ideas, I would be grateful if you'd share them. http://www.scribd.com/doc/234839353/...jjZhw97WCWYjLj .
The only other thought I have is that I received this discovery within 7 days of the hearing (but more than 3 days from the hearing), so I could try to make hay of this prejudicing my ability to mount a defense. Is that worth a shot?
********** #1 (on the back of the infraction; page 4 of the discovery linked above): **********
"Officer's report for citation/notice of infraction #XXXX
The information contained in and attached to this citation/notice of infraction is incorporated by reference into this report.
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that all statements made herein are true and accurate and that I am entering my authorized user ID and password to authenticate it.
Signature: DOE J. [typed] #XXXX
Date and place: 4/25/2014 City/Town of Sammamish, County of KING"
*****My analysis: This isn't a signature because it's not handwritten. It's not a digital signature despite his entering his authorized user ID and password because that isn't the asymmetrical cryptosystem required by RCW 19.34.020(11). That section of the RCW doesn't say anything about a "user ID" or "password." And unless his first name is one-letter long, he didn't provide his full name so it fails RCW 9A.72.085(3)(d). (And he's not an attorney, so it fails subsection (c)).
********** #2 (officer's statement; page 1 of the discovery linked above): **********
"I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of Washington that all statements made herein are true and accurate and I am entering my authorized user ID and password to authenticate it.
Deputy J.J. Doe [typed] #XXXX King County Sheriff's Office
Dated: 04/25/14 King County, WA"
*****My analysis: The same as above, with him providing a middle initial here showing that "J. Doe" definitely isn't his full name. Since he appears to incorporate this statement by reference into the notice of infraction, a properly signed notice of infraction would save this. But he didn't properly sign the NOI, per the above.

