In re the Marriage of King
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
¶1
C. Johnson, J.
This case involves the issue of whether an indigent parent has a constitutional right, primarily under the Washington State Constitution, to appointment of counsel at public expense in a dissolution proceeding. The constitutional claims are primarily based on article I, section 3; article I, section 10; and article I, section 12 of the Washington State Constitution. During a five day trial, the appellant, Brenda Kang, acted pro se and the respondent, Michael King, was represented by counsel. *382At the trial’s conclusion, the superior court entered a parenting plan granting…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Putman v. Wenatchee Valley Medical CenterWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- In re the Marriage of KatareWashington Supreme Court · 2012
- In re the Marriage of CoyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- State v. MendezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
- State v. MendezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.