Legal Opinion

State v. Williamson

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided April 11, 2000No. 17521-9-IIIPublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.

— In this prosecution for kidnapping and attempted first degree murder, Michael Williamson claims that he was denied a fair trial because the court allowed the State to exercise an unused peremptory challenge after the jury had been sworn and after the State’s first witness had started to testify. We conclude that the ruling is subject to the abuse of discretion standard of review and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the late peremptory challenge. Mr. Williamson also assigns error to the court’s admission of the victim’s hearsay statements under the excited…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. North Carolina v. AlfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Duncan v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. State v. GentryWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  4. People v. HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. State v. StraussWashington Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. State v. NealWashington Supreme Court · 2001
  2. State v. NealWashington Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. OhlsonWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  4. State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  5. State v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007

27 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