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.
10 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1939–2026 1 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 Reismillergreen2 sentences2001Krier is entitled to relief from the restraint arising out of the serious infraction hearing if he can prove actual and substantial prejudice as a result of constitutional error or, if he can prove nonconstitutional error that inherently results in a "complete miscarriage of justice." In re Cook, 114 Wash.2d 802, 813 , 792 P.2d 506 (1990); In re Reismiller, 101 Wash.2d 291, 293 , 678 P.2d 323 (1984). 2001Krier is entitled to relief from the restraint arising out of the serious infraction hearing if he can prove actual and substantial prejudice as a result of constitutional error or, if he can prove nonconstitutional error that inherently results in a "complete miscarriage of justice." In re Cook, 114 Wash.2d 802, 813 , 792 P.2d 506 (1990); In re Reismiller, 101 Wash.2d 291, 293 , 678 P.2d 323 (1984). | 2 | 2 |
Dawson v. Hearing Committeegreen2 sentences1999I would therefore affirm the Court of Appeals’ decision that Gronquist has been unconstitutionally deprived his liberty interest in good time credits absent that process constitutionally due, contrary to our holding in Dawson v. Hearing Committee, 92 Wn.2d 391 , 597 P.2d 1353 (1979). 1999I would therefore affirm the Court of Appeals’ decision that Gronquist has been unconstitutionally deprived his liberty interest in good time credits absent that process constitutionally due, contrary to our holding in Dawson v. Hearing Committee, 92 Wn.2d 391 , 597 P.2d 1353 (1979). | 2 | 2 |
In Re the Personal Restraint of Burtongreen2 sentences2001See also RAP 16.4(c)(5) (a petitioner's restraint is unlawful if the conditions or manner of the restraint are in violation of the Constitution of the United States or this state, or in violation of the laws of this state). [5] *724 In reviewing prison disciplinary proceedings, this court determines whether the action taken was "so arbitrary and capricious as to deny the petitioner a fundamentally fair proceeding ." Reismiller, 101 Wash.2d at 294 , 678 P.2d 323 ; In re Personal Restraint of Burton, 80 Wash.App. 573, 582 , 910 P.2d 1295 (1996). 2001See also RAP 16.4(c)(5) (a petitioner's restraint is unlawful if the conditions or manner of the restraint are in violation of the Constitution of the United States or this state, or in violation of the laws of this state). [5] *724 In reviewing prison disciplinary proceedings, this court determines whether the action taken was "so arbitrary and capricious as to deny the petitioner a fundamentally fair proceeding ." Reismiller, 101 Wash.2d at 294 , 678 P.2d 323 ; In re Personal Restraint of Burton, 80 Wash.App. 573, 582 , 910 P.2d 1295 (1996). | 1 | 3 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Malikgreen1 sentence2026App. 213, 220 , 215 P.3d 209 (2009) (“While a hearing officer has discretion to limit evidence presented at an infraction hearing, he or she must generally state proper reasons for doing so, either at the time of the hearing or thereafter.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Personal Restraint Petition Of Matthew Ray Douglas Schley
green
2 sentences2018As the Court of Appeals noted, "Schley's DOSA was functionally revoked once he was found guilty of fighting by 'some evidence' at the infraction hearing." Schley, 197 Wash. App. at 868 , 392 P.3d 1099 . 2018As the Court of Appeals noted, "Schley's DOSA was functionally revoked once he was found guilty of fighting by 'some evidence' at the infraction hearing." Schley, 197 Wash. App. at 868 , 392 P.3d 1099 . | 3 | 2018–2018 |
In Re the Personal Restraint of Cook
green
2 sentences2001Krier is entitled to relief from the restraint arising out of the serious infraction hearing if he can prove actual and substantial prejudice as a result of constitutional error or, if he can prove nonconstitutional error that inherently results in a "complete miscarriage of justice." In re Cook, 114 Wash.2d 802, 813 , 792 P.2d 506 (1990); In re Reismiller, 101 Wash.2d 291, 293 , 678 P.2d 323 (1984). 2001Krier is entitled to relief from the restraint arising out of the serious infraction hearing if he can prove actual and substantial prejudice as a result of constitutional error or, if he can prove nonconstitutional error that inherently results in a "complete miscarriage of justice." In re Cook, 114 Wash.2d 802, 813 , 792 P.2d 506 (1990); In re Reismiller, 101 Wash.2d 291, 293 , 678 P.2d 323 (1984). | 2 | 2001–2001 |
In re the Personal Restraint of Gronquist
green
2 sentences2017Schley’s DOSA was functionally revoked once he was found guilty of fighting by “some evidence” at the infraction hearing. ¶14 Citing In re Personal Restraint of Gronquist, 138 Wn.2d 388 , 978 P.2d 1083 (1999), the Department argues that Schley’s fighting infraction cannot be reevaluated with a heightened burden of proof in his DOSA revocation hearing. 2017Schley’s DOSA was functionally revoked once he was found guilty of fighting by “some evidence” at the infraction hearing. ¶14 Citing In re Personal Restraint of Gronquist, 138 Wn.2d 388 , 978 P.2d 1083 (1999), the Department argues that Schley’s fighting infraction cannot be reevaluated with a heightened burden of proof in his DOSA revocation hearing. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Love v. State
green
1 sentence1999Majority at 1090; see Dawson, 92 Wash.2d at 397 , 597 P.2d 1353 ("limited number of procedural safeguards must be afforded when a prison resident is subject to discipline for `serious misconduct' which may deprive him of a liberty interest ... [including] where not unduly hazardous, a right to call witnesses"); In re Personal Restraint of Burton, 80 Wash.App. at 585 , 910 P.2d 1295 (minimum due process to which prisoners are entitled in disciplinary proceedings include "an opportunity to ... call witnesses when not unduly hazardous to institutional safety and correctional goals") (citation omi | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Exchange National Bank v. United States
neutral
2 sentences1939Bank v. United States, 147 Wash. 176, 186 , 265 Pac. 722 , 62 A. L. 1939Bank v. United States, 147 Wash. 176, 186 , 265 Pac. 722 , 62 A. L. | 1 | 1939–1939 |
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.