Legal Opinion

State v. Rowell

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 29, 2007No. 25312-1-IIIPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 This appeal follows a conviction for possession of methamphetamine. The police stopped Benjamin Rowell because he was riding his bicycle without lights on a sidewalk at night. He says the lights were not required. We read RCW 46.61.780 as requiring lights. Mr. Rowell also argues that the State must prove that he knew the drugs were in his backpack. The statute (RCW 69-.50.401(1)) does not require knowledge and so the State needed to prove only possession. The court, then, properly shifted the burden to Mr. Rowell to show that the possession here was unwitting. We therefore affirm his…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. State v. DelgadoWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  2. State v. KellerWashington Supreme Court · 2001
  3. State v. BradshawWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. BradshawWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State v. StaleyWashington Supreme Court · 1994

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. HiggsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  2. State Of Washington, V Nicholas M. HiggsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  3. State Of Washington, V Nicholas M. HiggsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  4. State of Washington v. Darrell F. SmithCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API