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.
13 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 2013–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
In re the Personal Restraint of Coplandgreen2 sentences2013Copland, 176 Wn. 2013Copland, 176 Wn. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Fishergreen1 sentence2018Fisher, 185 Wn.2d at 849, 851 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re the Personal Restraint of Dyer
green
2 sentences2021Restraint of Dyer, 164 Wn.2d 274, 285 , 189 P.3d 759 (2008) (Dyer II). “[A]n inmate may be entitled to relief solely upon showing the [ISRB] set a minimum term in violation of a statute or regulation.” In re Pers. 2021Restraint of Dyer, 164 Wn.2d 274, 285 , 189 P.3d 759 (2008) (Dyer II). “[A]n inmate may be entitled to relief solely upon showing the [ISRB] set a minimum term in violation of a statute or regulation.” In re Pers. | 2 | 2016–2021 |
In Re Personal Restraint of Dyer
green
2 sentences2021Restraint of Dyer, 164 Wn.2d 274, 285 , 189 P.3d 759 (2008) (Dyer II). “[A]n inmate may be entitled to relief solely upon showing the [ISRB] set a minimum term in violation of a statute or regulation.” In re Pers. 2021Restraint of Dyer, 164 Wn.2d 274, 285 , 189 P.3d 759 (2008) (Dyer II). “[A]n inmate may be entitled to relief solely upon showing the [ISRB] set a minimum term in violation of a statute or regulation.” In re Pers. | 2 | 2016–2021 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Haghighi
green
2 sentences2024Restraint of Haghighi, 178 Wn.2d 435, 446-47 , 309 P.3d 459 (2013) (An untimely PRP submission resting on “facts and legal theory entirely distinct” from a timely PRP claim will not relate back.). 2024Restraint of Haghighi, 178 Wn.2d 435, 446-47 , 309 P.3d 459 (2013) (An untimely PRP submission resting on “facts and legal theory entirely distinct” from a timely PRP claim will not relate back.). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Personal Restraint Petition Of Arthur Lewis Dove
green
2 sentences2020Dove, 196 Wn. 2020Dove, 196 Wn. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Henderson
green
2 sentences2018The majority discusses the PRP standard of review, but decides the jury instruction issue based on State v. Henderson, 182 Wn.2d 734 , 344 P.3d 1207 (2015), and its legal conclusion as though this case were on direct appeal. 2018The majority discusses the PRP standard of review, but decides the jury instruction issue based on State v. Henderson, 182 Wn.2d 734 , 344 P.3d 1207 (2015), and its legal conclusion as though this case were on direct appeal. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State Of Washington v. Brian M. Bassett
green
2 sentences2018But we disagree with the State, as discussed below, that Nga Ngoeung’s restraint is lawful. 6 The resentencing court’s written findings and conclusions, if any, were not designated in our record. 7 No. 47157-4-II The procedural issue is controlled by our decision in Bassett, 198 Wn. 2018But we disagree with the State, as discussed below, that Nga Ngoeung’s restraint is lawful. 6 The resentencing court’s written findings and conclusions, if any, were not designated in our record. 7 No. 47157-4-II The procedural issue is controlled by our decision in Bassett, 198 Wn. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Glasmann
green
2 sentences2017In Glasmann, our Supreme Court addressed a prosecutorial misconduct claim in a PRP under the direct appeal standards without mentioning the PRP prejudice requirements, but the court did not expressly state that the PRP standard does not apply in this context. 175 Wn.2d at 704-05 . 2017In Glasmann, our Supreme Court addressed a prosecutorial misconduct claim in a PRP under the direct appeal standards without mentioning the PRP prejudice requirements, but the court did not expressly state that the PRP standard does not apply in this context. 175 Wn.2d at 704-05 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Parks
neutral
1 sentence2017We hold that defense counsel provided ineffective assistance because but for counsel’s failure to 1 State v. Parks, noted at 169 Wn. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Brady v. Maryland
green
2 sentences2016Accordingly, we deny his request for a reference hearing and relief from restraint. 1 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S. Ct. 1194 , 10 L. 2016Accordingly, we deny his request for a reference hearing and relief from restraint. 1 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S. Ct. 1194 , 10 L. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Coggin
green
2 sentences2016Restraint of Coggin, 182 Wn.2d 115, 120-22 , 340 P.3d 810 (2014) (refusing to presume prejudice for a PRP even when the claim – a public trial right violation – requires no prejudice on direct appeal).5 Wolf has the burden of proof on actual and substantial prejudice. 2016Restraint of Coggin, 182 Wn.2d 115, 120-22 , 340 P.3d 810 (2014) (refusing to presume prejudice for a PRP even when the claim – a public trial right violation – requires no prejudice on direct appeal).5 Wolf has the burden of proof on actual and substantial prejudice. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Coats
green
2 sentences2016Coats, 173 Wn.2d at 132 . 2016Coats, 173 Wn.2d at 132 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.