Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Crider

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided August 1, 1995No. 13839-9-IIIPublished

1DissentSweeney, J.

(dissenting) — The current right of allocu*862tion is spelled out in the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981: "Before imposing a sentence upon a defendant, the court shall conduct a sentencing hearing. . . . The court shall . . . allow arguments from the . . . offender . . . .” RCW 9.94A.110. Whether Michael Crider was denied that right to allocution is questionable. But even if he was, any error was harmless. I therefore respectfully dissent.

Before he sentenced Mr. Crider, the judge read a lengthy letter from him, addressed specifically to the judge, outlining his troubled childhood, problems in his…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Green v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  3. State v. WanrowWashington Supreme Court · 1977
  4. State v. LaneWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State v. AumickWashington Supreme Court · 1995

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API