Legal Opinion

State v. Rai

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided September 7, 1999No. 40098-3-IPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrosse, J.

Once a jury returns a special verdict, finding that a defendant was armed with a deadly weapon during the commission of a crime, it is up to the sentencing court to determine whether the defendant’s sentence must be lengthened by the deadly weapon enhancement provisions of RCW 9.94A.125 or the firearm enhancement provisions of RCW 9.94A.310. But where, as here, the uncontested evidence before the court shows that the defendant was armed with a firearm, the court errs as a matter of law by failing to enhance the defendant’s sentence under RCW 9.94A.310. We affirm Rai’s conviction, but vacate…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. ByrdWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State v. JoyWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  3. State v. MeggyesyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1998
  4. State v. BrakesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1970

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. RecuencoWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  2. State v. RecuencoWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. State v. DeSantiagoWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State v. DeSantiagoWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  5. In re the Personal Restraint of EastmondWashington Supreme Court · 2012

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