Legal Opinion · Dissent

In re the Personal Restraint of Adolph

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 18, 2010No. 82868-7Published

1DissentSanders, J.

¶29 (dissenting) — I agree Vincent Adolph’s personal restraint petition is not procedurally barred and is properly before the court. However, because the State’s evidence was not comparable to a certified copy of the judgment and sentence and was insufficient to prove the Lincoln County DUI2 conviction, I dissent.

The State must present evidence comparable to a certified copy of the judgment and sentence of a prior conviction.

¶30 At sentencing “the trial court may rely on no more information than is admitted by the plea agreement, or admitted, acknowledged, or proved in a trial or at the time…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. State v. FordWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  2. City of Redmond v. MooreWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  3. City of Redmond v. MooreWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  4. United States v. Herbert BaylinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
  5. State v. MorleyWashington Supreme Court · 1998

26 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