My question involves criminal law for the state of: Washington
I'm trying to understand how & why the system works the way it does. I'm also not exactly clear on some of the terminology however this is the situation. The Subject pled not guilty to 1 count of 4th degree assault & 1 count of interference with the reporting of a domestic violence incident. He entered into a stipulated order of continuance (SOC) which contained several conditions including monitored unsupervised probation, a no contact order, DV treatment program (30 days) and no firearms (18 months). He completed the conditions of the SOC in 2014 at which time the prosecution entered a motion for for dismissal (all of this is from reading the docket report).
The Revised Code of Washington (RCW) 9.41.040 Unlawful Possession of a firearm states that a person is guilty of unlawful possession if they have been "convicted" of a domestic violence assault in the fourth degree. An Opinion issued by the WA Attorney General Office analyzing the restoration of firearm rights states however that "conviction includes a dismissal entered after a period of probation, suspension or deferral of sentence...". The WA ATG opinion can be found here: http://www.atg.wa.gov/ago-opinions/w...session-rights
The only thing I can think of is that if a case is thrown out then no harm no foul but how can the court (or prosecutor impose conditions, then dismiss the case and state that this is not a dismissal or a conviction? Does the fact that it's an SOC make the difference or the fact that the Subject originally pled not guilty which makes it a non-conviction for the purpose of being a prohibited person when it comes to firearm rights?

