Legal Opinion
State v. Bahl
Washington Supreme Court
Decided October 9, 2008No. 79988-1PublishedCited by 206 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, J.
¶1 The defendant argues that he is entitled to bring a preenforcement vagueness challenge to conditions of community custody imposed as part of his sentence. We agree and hold that several of the conditions are unconstitutionally vague. We remand for resentencing.
FACTS
f 2 Petitioner Eric Bahl was charged with second degree rape, first degree burglary, residential burglary, indecent exposure, and first degree criminal trespass. He was convicted of second degree rape and first degree burglary, and sentenced to the statutory maximum of life in prison and a minimum term within the standard range.…
2Cases cited67 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Miller v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
62 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by206 opinions
- State v. BlazinaWashington Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. ValenciaWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. ValenciaWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- TracFone Wireless, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. Hai Minh NguyenWashington Supreme Court · 2018
201 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.