Scott motion in Washington

2022Scott also asserts that the DOC defendants should be held liable for the tort of false imprisonment. “[A] jail is liable for false imprisonment if it holds an individual for an unreasonable time after it is under a duty to release the individual.” Stalter v. State, 151 Wn.2d 148, 155 , 86 P.3d 1159 (2004).

2022Scott also asserts that the DOC defendants should be held liable for the tort of false imprisonment. “[A] jail is liable for false imprisonment if it holds an individual for an unreasonable time after it is under a duty to release the individual.” Stalter v. State, 151 Wn.2d 148, 155 , 86 P.3d 1159 (2004).

2021Mr. Scott argues that the State had a duty to confiscate and preserve the victim’s cell phone because it contained materially exculpatory evidence, citing CrR 4.7(a)(3) and State v. Wittenbarger, 124 Wn.2d 467 , 880 P.2d 517 (1994).

2021Mr. Scott argues that the State had a duty to confiscate and preserve the victim’s cell phone because it contained materially exculpatory evidence, citing CrR 4.7(a)(3) and State v. Wittenbarger, 124 Wn.2d 467 , 880 P.2d 517 (1994).

2021In State v. Israel, the defendant alleged that his counsel should have made certain arguments in closing. 113 Wn.

2019“A trial court does not have the authority to modify even its own decree in the absence of conditions justifying the reopening of the judgment.” In re Marriage of Thompson, 97 Wn.

2018The State appealed. ¶ 7 The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's grant of a new sentencing hearing, finding, "The constitutional violation identified in the Miller line of cases is the failure to allow a juvenile offender the opportunity for release when his or her crime was the result of youthful traits." State v. Scott, 196 Wash. App. 961 , 971, 385 P.3d 783 (2016).

2018The State appealed. ¶ 7 The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's grant of a new sentencing hearing, finding, "The constitutional violation identified in the Miller line of cases is the failure to allow a juvenile offender the opportunity for release when his or her crime was the result of youthful traits." State v. Scott, 196 Wash. App. 961 , 971, 385 P.3d 783 (2016).

2017Mauerman, 44 Wn.2d at 830 .3 We reverse the trial court's order denying Scott's motion for change of judge, vacate the October 28, 2016, order on revision, and remand for proceedings before a new judge.

2017WE CONCUR: ,q so" 3 Scott asks that we address the merits of his remaining claims "insofar as they are likely to recur on remand." See In re Marriage of Rockwell, 157 Wn.

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

2009State v. Brockob, 159 Wash.2d 311, 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (2006) (citing State v. Aten, 130 Wash.2d 640, 655-56 , 927 P.2d 210 (1996)). "[T]he State must present evidence independent of the [defendant's] incriminating statement that the crime [the] defendant described in the statement actually occurred." Brockob, 159 Wash.2d at 328 , 150 P.3d 59 (citing Aten, 130 Wash.2d at 656 , 927 P.2d 210 ). [16] As we have earlier noted, it appears that only the prosecutor's affidavit of probable cause, which summarizes DH's interview and DuFour's statements, was part of the record at the time Scott entered hi

1997App. 277, 291 , 834 P.2d 1091 (1992), review denied, 120 Wn.2d 1024 (1993). *846 Scott’s standard earnest money agreement provides that in the event of default by the purchaser, the earnest money will be forfeited to the seller as liquidated damages.