Legal Opinion
In re the Personal Restraint of Khan
Washington Supreme Court
Decided November 25, 2015No. 89657-7PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
González, J.
¶1 — Zahid Khan was tried, without an interpreter, for multiple counts of child molestation and rape. Khan is not a native English speaker, and his level of English fluency is disputed. It is undisputed that he was not offered an interpreter by the court or by his attorney. Khan contends, among other things, that his trial was unfair and that his attorney provided ineffective assistance of counsel by not securing an interpreter. Khan asks that we vacate his convictions. We find he has not made the requisite showing for such relief. In the alternative, Khan asks for an evidentiary…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Neitzke v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- In re MeippenWashington Supreme Court · 2019
- In re the Personal Restraint of CaldellisWashington Supreme Court · 2016
- In re Pers. Restraint of GronquistWashington Supreme Court · 2018
- In re Pers. Restraint of JamesWashington Supreme Court · 2018
- Ex parte GarciaCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2016
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.