State v. Gonzales
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
Grosse, J
In the course of a sentencing hearing where the trial court imposes a sentence at the low end of the standard range as agreed to by the prosecutor, there is no violation of the defendant’s right to speak prior to imposition of sentence when the record clearly discloses that he did not seek to exercise that right, but rather, affirmatively expressed his concurrence in the proceedings, telling the court to “get it over with” and thanking the court immediately after the judge imposed the sentence agreed to.
Discussion at sentencing focused on Gonzales’ prior criminal history, especially…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- State v. WanrowWashington Supreme Court · 1977
- State v. CriderCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1995
- State v. Aguilar-RiveraCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
3Cited by20 opinions
- State v. HatchieWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. HatchieWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- State v. AvilaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
- State v. AvilaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
- State v. M.A.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2001
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.