Docket No. 78564-3 Facts: Petitioner David Pitts entered into a contract with Glen Cloninger to convey his interest in a parcel of land that he was leasing to Cloninger if Pitts either defaulted on the lease or the lease expired before Pitts exercised his option to purchase. The lease subsequently expired without Pitts either renewing his lease or purchasing the property but Pitts refused to convey his interest in the property to Cloninger. After Cloninger assigned his interest in the property to respondent Gordon Crafts and his wife Jaymie, the Crafts filed suit against Pitts for specific performance. However, Pitts had in the interim declared bankruptcy and had his debts discharged by the bankruptcy court. The trial court ruled that the bankruptcy court had not discharged the Crafts’ action for specific performance and ordered Pitts to quitclaim the property. Continue reading
Daily Archives: Thursday, March 15, 2007
In re personal restraint of Mulholland
Docket No. 79150-3 Facts: Respondent Daniel Mulholland was convicted of six counts of first degree assault while armed with a firearm and one count of drive-by shooting in the Superior Court for Pierce County. The trial court ordered that Mulholland’s first degree assault sentences be served consecutively, ruling that under Washington Revised Code §9.94A.589(1)(b) it had no discretion to order that these sentences be served concurrently. After exhausting his direct appeals, Mulholland filed a personal restraint petition in the Washington Court of Appeals. It asserted that the trial court erred in ruling that it lacked discretion to order that his first degree assault sentences be served concurrently. Continue reading
Washington v. Nichols
Docket No. 78497-3 Facts: Petitioner Caleb Nichols was convicted of possession of methamphetamine in the Superior Court for Spokane County after a search of his person following a traffic stop revealed methamphetamine. Nichols appealed his conviction, asserting that the traffic stop was pretextual and that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to challenge its legality. The Washington Court of Appeals affirmed Nichols’ conviction. Continue reading