Docket No. 84831-9 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 38581-3)  Facts:  Tahoma Terra filed an application with the respondent city of Yelm to develop a 32 acre parcel of land into residential lots.  After the application was approved, petitioner J.Z. Knight, a nearby property owner who holds senior water rights, filed a Land Use Petition Act (Washington Revised Code §36.70C) petition in the Superior Court for Thurston County that asked the superior court to reverse the county’s decision.  Knight asserted that she has an interest in obtaining water connections when she develops her undeveloped property and that her senior water rights would be directly and adversely affected by Tahoma Terra’s proposed development.  The superior court granted the petition. Continue reading →

Docket No. 84921-8 (from Snohomish Case No. 10-2-06342-9)  Facts:  Washington Revised Code §46.63.170 authorizes local governments to enact ordinances that allow the use of automated traffic safety cameras to issue notices of traffic infractions.  Pursuant to this authorization, the respondent city of Mukilteo enacted an ordinance authorizing and setting forth guidelines for the use of automated traffic safety cameras.  Residents of Mukilteo subsequently submitted Initiative 2, which would forbid the city from installing automated traffic safety cameras without voter approval, limit the amount of fines that could be imposed for infractions arising from automated safety camera surveillance, and repeal the ordinance authorizing the use of automated traffic safety cameras, for inclusion on the ballot.  After the Mukilteo City Council directed that the initiative be included on the ballot, Mukilteo Citizens for Simple Government petitioned the Superior Court for Snohomish County for a declaratory judgment that Initiative 2 is beyond the scope of the local initiative power and an injunction preventing its inclusion on the ballot. Continue reading →

Docket No. 83731-7 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 63110-1)  Facts:  Petitioner Chad Pierce was convicted of two counts of first degree child molestation in the Superior Court for King County and incarcerated.  Shortly thereafter, the Department of Corrections began to deduct costs associated with Pierce’s incarceration from Pierce’s inmate trust account.  In order to stop the deductions, Pierce subsequently filed a personal restraint petition that asserted that the Department of Corrections may not deduct costs associated with his incarceration from his inmate trust account because such costs were not among the legal financial obligations imposed as part of his judgment and sentence. Continue reading →

Docket No. 84223-0 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 37210-0)  Facts:  Petitioner Daniel Snapp’s automobile was searched after he was stopped for driving while wearing a defective seatbelt, admitted that he was in possession of drug paraphernalia, and was taken into custody.  The search revealed evidence of identity theft and Snapp was subsequently convicted of first and second degree identity theft in the Superior Court for Pierce County.  Snapp appealed his convictions on grounds that the search was unlawful and the evidence derived from it should have been suppressed.  The Washington Court of Appeals held that the search was lawful under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Arizona v. Gant, which held that a warrantless search of an automobile incident to the arrest of a recent occupant of the vehicle is lawful under the 4^th Amendment to the United States Constitution when it is reasonable to believe that evidence relevant to the crime of arrest might be found in the vehicle Continue reading →