Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Washington opinions name it 1 courts 2009–2023 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Zavala-Reynoso
green
2 sentences2009Restraint of Dalluge, 162 Wash.2d 814, 818 , 177 P.3d 675 (2008) (when ascertaining legislative intent, an appellate court views the sentencing scheme as a whole, attempting to harmonize all relevant provisions). ¶ 64 I am also concerned with the Linerud court's characterization of a judgment and sentence in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(5) as "invalid on its face," a proposition drawn from State v. Zavala-Reynoso, 127 Wash. App. 119 , 110 P.3d 827 (2005). 2009App. 119 , 110 P.3d 827 (2005). | 2 | 2009–2009 |
In Re Personal Restraint of Dalluge
green
2 sentences2009Restraint of Dalluge, 162 Wash.2d 814, 818 , 177 P.3d 675 (2008) (when ascertaining legislative intent, an appellate court views the sentencing scheme as a whole, attempting to harmonize all relevant provisions). ¶ 64 I am also concerned with the Linerud court's characterization of a judgment and sentence in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(5) as "invalid on its face," a proposition drawn from State v. Zavala-Reynoso, 127 Wash. App. 119 , 110 P.3d 827 (2005). 2009Restraint of Dalluge, 162 Wn.2d 814, 818 , 177 P.3d 675 (2008) (when ascertaining legislative intent, an appellate court views the sentencing scheme as a whole, attempting to harmonize all relevant provisions). ¶45 I am also concerned with the Linerud court’s characterization of a judgment and sentence in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(5) as “invalid on its face,” a proposition drawn from State v. Zavala-Reynoso, 127 Wn. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Dalluge
green
2 sentences2009Restraint of Dalluge, 162 Wash.2d 814, 818 , 177 P.3d 675 (2008) (when ascertaining legislative intent, an appellate court views the sentencing scheme as a whole, attempting to harmonize all relevant provisions). ¶ 64 I am also concerned with the Linerud court's characterization of a judgment and sentence in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(5) as "invalid on its face," a proposition drawn from State v. Zavala-Reynoso, 127 Wash. App. 119 , 110 P.3d 827 (2005). 2009Restraint of Dalluge, 162 Wn.2d 814, 818 , 177 P.3d 675 (2008) (when ascertaining legislative intent, an appellate court views the sentencing scheme as a whole, attempting to harmonize all relevant provisions). ¶45 I am also concerned with the Linerud court’s characterization of a judgment and sentence in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(5) as “invalid on its face,” a proposition drawn from State v. Zavala-Reynoso, 127 Wn. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Zavala-Reynoso
green
2 sentences2009Restraint of Dalluge, 162 Wash.2d 814, 818 , 177 P.3d 675 (2008) (when ascertaining legislative intent, an appellate court views the sentencing scheme as a whole, attempting to harmonize all relevant provisions). ¶ 64 I am also concerned with the Linerud court's characterization of a judgment and sentence in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(5) as "invalid on its face," a proposition drawn from State v. Zavala-Reynoso, 127 Wash. App. 119 , 110 P.3d 827 (2005). 2009Restraint of Dalluge, 162 Wn.2d 814, 818 , 177 P.3d 675 (2008) (when ascertaining legislative intent, an appellate court views the sentencing scheme as a whole, attempting to harmonize all relevant provisions). ¶45 I am also concerned with the Linerud court’s characterization of a judgment and sentence in violation of RCW 9.94A.505(5) as “invalid on its face,” a proposition drawn from State v. Zavala-Reynoso, 127 Wn. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Blake
green
2 sentences2023However, because that conviction was premised on prior convictions for possession of a controlled substance, it was vacated on resentencing following our Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Blake, 197 Wn.2d 170 , 481 P.3d 521 (2021). 2 No. 84012-6-I/3 offender. 2023However, because that conviction was premised on prior convictions for possession of a controlled substance, it was vacated on resentencing following our Supreme Court’s decision in State v. Blake, 197 Wn.2d 170 , 481 P.3d 521 (2021). 2 No. 84012-6-I/3 offender. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
In re the Personal Restraint of LaChapelle
green
2 sentences2023Grantham relies on In re Personal Restraint of LaChapelle, 153 Wn.2d 1 , 100 P.3d 805 (2004), to support his assertion that including an unscored conviction in the judgment and sentence is error. 2023However, LaChapelle holds only that juvenile convictions committed before the offender was 15 years old cannot be counted in an offender score if the juvenile offense was committed prior to the amendment to the Sentencing Reform Act, chapter 9.94A RCW, that allowed such convictions to be counted. 153 Wn.2d at 12-13 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
In RE LaHAPELLE
green
1 sentence2023Grantham relies on In re Personal Restraint of LaChapelle, 153 Wn.2d 1 , 100 P.3d 805 (2004), to support his assertion that including an unscored conviction in the judgment and sentence is error. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
State v. Peltier
green
1 sentence2019Peltier, 181 Wn.2d at 294 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.