Legal Opinion

State v. A.M.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 29, 2001No. Nos. 46983-5-I; 46984-3-IPublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Becker, A.C.J.

— A statute requires the trial court to impose one victim penalty assessment per case or count as part of a juvenile disposition. RCW 7.68.035. We hold the State is entitled to appeal an order imposing the wrong number of victim penalty assessments. Because the trial court imposed only one victim penalty assessment, instead of three, for three separate cases, the order of disposition is reversed.

The State charged A.M., a juvenile, with four separate offenses: Taking a Motor Vehicle Without Permission, Assault 4, and two counts of Robbery 2. The court dismissed *327one charge of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Waste Management of Seattle, Inc. v. Utilities & Transportation CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  2. State v. ChapmanWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State v. ChapmanWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  4. State v. Q.D.Washington Supreme Court · 1984
  5. State v. AMRCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Truck Ins. Exchange v. VanPort Homes, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  2. Overton v. Consolidated Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Truck Insurance Exchange v. VanPort Homes, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2002
  4. Woo v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  5. Woo v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2007

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API