Legal Opinion
In re the Personal Restraint of Stockwell
Washington Supreme Court
Decided January 23, 2014No. 86001-7PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, C.J.
¶1 Petitioner Daniel Stockwell seeks to withdraw his guilty plea to a 1986 charge of statutory rape in the first degree. Stockwell’s plea statement and judgment and sentence misstated the statutory maximum sentence. We hold that in a personal restraint petition (PRP), a petitioner must show actual and substantial prejudice in a challenge to a guilty plea based on such a misstatement. Because Stockwell fails to make this showing, we affirm the Court of Appeals.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
¶2 In 1985, Daniel Stockwell was convicted of indecent liberties and given a special sex offender…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Engle v. IsaacSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- State v. KitchenWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- In Re the Personal Restraint of CookWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- In re the Personal Restraint of CoatsWashington Supreme Court · 2011
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- In re the Personal Restraint of CrossWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- In re the Personal Restraint of CogginWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- Maytown Sand & Gravel, LLC v. Thurston CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2018
- In re the Personal Restraint of YatesWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- Personal Restraint Petition Of Arthur Lewis DoveCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.