State v. Duffey
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtSeinfeld, J.
The State charged Timothy Charles Duffey 1 with barratry, RCW 9.12.010, alleging that the “Demand for Particulars” (Demand) Duffey served on the police officers who had cited him for traffic offenses purported to be or resembled a “judicial process.” The trial court dismissed the charge and the State appeals. We conclude that the Demand, which neither purports to be nor resembles a court order or a document used to inform a defendant of the institution of judicial proceedings against him, does not constitute a judicial process, as the barratry statute uses that term. Thus, we affirm the…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- United States v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Waste Management of Seattle, Inc. v. Utilities & Transportation CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- City of Redmond v. Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- State v. KnapstadWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- State v. LewisWashington Supreme Court · 1998
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- State v. SullivanWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. SullivanWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Hough v. StockbridgeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
- Hough v. StockbridgeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
- State of Washington v. Herbert Elmer EllsworthCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.