strength defense in Washington

2017Id. at 353 . 2 The overriding concern is to ensure that justice is done.

2011Id. at 353 .

2017Pretrial disclosure is required because when asserting diminished capacity, the defense “must obtain a corroborating expert opinion and disclose that evidence to the prosecution pretrial,” giving the State a reasonable opportunity to decide whether to obtain its own evaluation “[depending on the strength of the defense’s showing.” Id. (citing CrR 4.7(b)(1), (b)(2)(viii), (g); In re Pers.

2017Restraint of Hutchinson, 147 Wn.2d 197, 204 , 53 P.3d 17 (2002)).

2017Restraint of Hutchinson, 147 Wn.2d 197, 204 , 53 P.3d 17 (2002)).

1996We observed that "where the defendant moves promptly to vacate and has a strong case for excusable neglect, the strength of the defense is less important to the reviewing court.” 41 Wn.

1957But appellant argues that there is no evidence whatever in the record showing that the disputed tract was a part of the land included in the lease; that appellant was entitled to the presumption that the character of his possession was adverse, arising because of his proof that his possession was open, notorious, continuous, and uninterrupted for the required time (Hovila v. Bartek, 48 Wn. (2d) 238, 292 P. (2d) 877 (1956); that, since the evidence failed to show the land in controversy to be a part of the land leased and respondent produced no evidence to rebut the presumption of adverse posse

1914Morse v. Moore, 83 Me. 473 , 22 Atl. 362 , 23 Am.

1914Morse v. Moore, 83 Me. 473 , 22 Atl. 362 , 23 Am.