Judge Grant presiding in Lake Forest Park Municipal Court on Dec. 22 granted a series of motions to suppress and dismiss after defense counsel said the city had not provided requested discovery, approved several deferred findings and set multiple continuances to March 23, 2026.

The decisions affected multiple infraction cases on the afternoon calendar. Defense counsel told the court they were filing 3.1(b) discovery requests and, where there was no city response, asked the court to suppress evidence and dismiss. The judge repeatedly granted those motions, including in camera-ticket and photo-ticket matters.

"I will suppress and dismiss," Judge Grant said in response to a motion framed under the court's discovery rule. On the Farhadi matter, the court granted a deferred finding: "I will grant that on that case, it's 6 months, No infractions and the $1.75," the judge stated. The court also found Dina Atiye eligible for a six-month deferred finding with $175 in bail, noting no moving-traffic violation on that charge.

Counsel for several defendants told the court they had not received discovery from the prosecutor's office, leading to dismissal on DNRs (declarations of responsibility) where DNR paperwork had been filed, and suppression/dismissal under IRLJ 3.1(b) where no discovery was produced. Judge Grant acknowledged receipt of some faxed transmissions and dismissed or granted suppression where the defense had made timely requests and the city did not respond.

Some defense attorneys asked for continuances rather than immediate rulings; the clerk and court set the next available scheduling date as March 23, 2026, at 1:30 p.m. Several attorneys agreed to waive speedy-hearing rights to allow that continuance. Judge Grant confirmed, "So March 23 is our next available calendar," and several matters were set for that date.

Why this matters: Repeated suppression and dismissal rulings on discovery grounds reduced the number of contested matters the court needed to hear, and the decisions—and continuances—will affect how and when defendants can seek deferred findings in future infractions. Lawyers and the court also flagged statutory timing constraints that affect eligibility for deferred findings.

The court handled camera-ticket and photo-ticket cases administratively where possible and dismissed or continued others based on the presence of DNRs or discovery compliance. The calendar session ended after additional scheduling discussions and routine administrative items; parties were directed to submit and confirm paperwork to the court clerk as needed.

Next steps: Several matters were continued to March 23, 2026, for further proceedings; parties who received dismissals on discovery grounds may re-file if appropriate procedural steps are met. The court also asked prosecutors and defense counsel to coordinate on outstanding discovery transmissions to prevent similar dismissals in the future.