Docket No. 86633-3 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 63559-0)
Synopsis: Whether in this criminal prosecution a 22-month delay between the filing of the charge and the start of trial violated the defendant’s constitutional right to a speedy trial.
Monthly Archives: June 2012
Manary v. Anderson
Docket No. 86776-3 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 65821-2)
Synopsis: Whether a devise by will of a residence that had previously been transferred to a revocable living trust served to revoke the terms of the trust under RCW 11.11.003(1) even though the will did not mention the trust.
Synopsis: Whether a devise by will of a residence that had previously been transferred to a revocable living trust served to revoke the terms of the trust under RCW 11.11.003(1) even though the will did not mention the trust.
Loeffelholz v. Univ. of Wash. & Lukehart
Docket No. 86511-6 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 65364-4)
Synopsis: Whether, in an action for hostile work environment discrimination based on sexual orientation, the employee may present evidence that conduct occurring after the amendment to Washington’s Law Against Discrimination prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination was part of a pattern of conduct that predated the amendment.
Synopsis: Whether, in an action for hostile work environment discrimination based on sexual orientation, the employee may present evidence that conduct occurring after the amendment to Washington’s Law Against Discrimination prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination was part of a pattern of conduct that predated the amendment.
In re the Personal Restraint Petition of Weber
Docket No. 85992-2
Synopsis: Petition was filed raising an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. The Court must determine whether petitioner has made a threshold showing of innocence.
Synopsis: Petition was filed raising an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. The Court must determine whether petitioner has made a threshold showing of innocence.
State v. Veliz
Docket No. 85860-8 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 28495-6)
Synopsis: Whether a domestic violence protection order entered in connection with a marriage dissolution proceeding was a “court-ordered parenting plan,” violation of which constituted the crime of first degree custodial interference under RCW 9A.40.060(2).
Synopsis: Whether a domestic violence protection order entered in connection with a marriage dissolution proceeding was a “court-ordered parenting plan,” violation of which constituted the crime of first degree custodial interference under RCW 9A.40.060(2).
Schroeder v. Excelsior Management Group
Docket No. 86433-1 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 29124-3)
Question: Under WA’s Deed of Trust Act, is agricultural land subject to nonjudicial foreclosure?
Question: Under WA’s Deed of Trust Act, is agricultural land subject to nonjudicial foreclosure?
Automotive United Trades Organization v. State
Docket No. 85971-0 (from King Case No. 10-2-43108-0 KNT)
Question: Does the Washington State Constitution prevent the State from imposing a tax on the first in-state possession of motor vehicle fuel, and can the Plaintiff’s constitutional challenge be time-barred by a 22-year delay in filing suit?
Question: Does the Washington State Constitution prevent the State from imposing a tax on the first in-state possession of motor vehicle fuel, and can the Plaintiff’s constitutional challenge be time-barred by a 22-year delay in filing suit?
Clark County Washington v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Review Board
Docket No. 85989-2 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 39546-1)
Question: Did the Growth Management Hearings Review Board’s review of Clark County’s designation of certain lands as UGA become moot when those lands were annexed?
Question: Did the Growth Management Hearings Review Board’s review of Clark County’s designation of certain lands as UGA become moot when those lands were annexed?
In re the Personal Restraint Petition of Dyer
Docket No. 85091-7
Question: Did the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board abuse its discretion by denying parole to a sex offender based, in part, on offender’s lack of treatment for which he remains ineligible because he denies guilt?
Question: Did the Indeterminate Sentence Review Board abuse its discretion by denying parole to a sex offender based, in part, on offender’s lack of treatment for which he remains ineligible because he denies guilt?
State v. Lamb
Docket No. 86603-1 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 39849-4)
Synopsis: Whether the “saving statute,” RCW 10.01.040, permits a 1987 indecent liberties conviction to serve as the predicate offense for a current charge of unlawful possession of a firearm even though in 1988 the indecent liberties statute was amended to decriminalize the act that formed the basis of the defendant’s conviction.
Synopsis: Whether the “saving statute,” RCW 10.01.040, permits a 1987 indecent liberties conviction to serve as the predicate offense for a current charge of unlawful possession of a firearm even though in 1988 the indecent liberties statute was amended to decriminalize the act that formed the basis of the defendant’s conviction.