Monthly Archives: January 2012

Washington v. Rowland

by

Docket No. 86117-0 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 64262-6)  Facts:  Petitioner Michael Rowland was convicted of first degree murder and taking a motor vehicle without permission in the Superior Court for Snohomish County.  Based upon the judge’s finding of deliberate cruelty, Rowland was sentenced to an exceptional sentence.  Rowland subsequently filed a personal restraint petition in the Washington Court of Appeals challenging the calculation of his offender score.  After the state of Washington conceded that Rowland’s offender score had been improperly calculated, the Washington Court of Appeals remanded the case for resentencing.  On remand, the superior court imposed a standard range sentence corresponding to the reduced offender score and reimposed the sentence enhancement for deliberate cruelty.  Rowland appealed his sentence, asserting that a jury finding was required to support the exceptional sentence under the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Blakely v. Washington. Continue reading →

Washington v. Lyons

by

Docket No. 85746-6 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 28693-2)  Facts:  A Yakima District Court judge issued a warrant to search petitioner Patrick Lyons’ property on the basis of an affidavit provided by the Yakima Police Department which detailed information provided by a confidential source indicating that there was a marijuana growing operation on Lyons’ property.  After the subsequent search revealed marijuana plants, supplies for packaging marijuana, and a large quantity of mushrooms, Lyons was charged with manufacturing marijuana, possesion of marijuana with intent to deliver, and possession of mushrooms with intent to deliver.  Lyons moved to suppress the evidence derived from the search on grounds that because the affidavit said nothing about the timing of the confidential source’s observation, it failed to state timely probable cause.  The trial court granted Lyons’ motion.  Upon appeal, the Washington Court of Appeals reversed, holding that language in the affidavit stating that the confidential source contacted the Yakima Police Department “within the last 48 hours” could be read to apply both to the time of contact and to the time of the confidential source’s observations. Continue reading →

In re estate of Blessing

by

Docket No. 85944-2 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 29153-7)  Facts:  Audrey Blessing, who had three children from a previous marriage, married Carl Blaschka, who had four children of his own from a previous marriage, in 1964.  The couple raised all seven children together, although Blessing never legally adopted Blaschka’s children, and remained married until Blaschka’s death in 1994.  After Blessing died in an automobile accident, Blessing’s daughter Cynthia Hagensen, the personal representative of Blessing’s estate, filed a wrongful death action against the driver who caused the accident in the Superior Court for Spokane County.  Blaschka’s son John Blaschka and his siblings Julie Frank, Diana Estrep, and Carla Blaschka subsequently petitioned the superior court for a determination that they are entitled to participate as statutory beneficiaries in the wrongful death action.  Hagensen moved to dismiss the petition on grounds that the Blaschka children were not Blessing’s stepchildren under Washington Revised Code §4.20.020 and therefore are not entitled to recover under the wrongful death statute. Continue reading →

State v. Rice

by
Docket No. 85893-4 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 39600-9)
Synopsis: Whether statutes that require the prosecutor to allege certain sentence enhancing factors (that the crime was sexually motivated, that the sex offense was predatory, that the sex offense victim was less than 15 years old) when the evidence supports those factors violates the separation of powers doctrine.

Auburn v. Gauntt

by

Docket No. 85892-6 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 64838-1)  Facts:  Respondent Dustin Gauntt was charged by the petitioner city of Auburn with possession of marijuana in violation of Washington Revised Code §69.50.4014 and the unlawful use of drug paraphernalia in violation of Washington Revised Code §69.50.412(1).  Gauntt moved to dismiss the charges on grounds that the city of Auburn lacks the authority to charge him with violating either state statute because it has not adopted them as part of its municipal code.  The Auburn Municipal Court denied the motion to dismiss and Gauntt was convicted of both charges.  Upon appeal, the Superior Court for King County reversed and ordered the charges against Gauntt dismissed. Continue reading →