Legal Opinion

In re the Detention of Keeney

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 23, 2007No. 25277-9-IIIPublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKulik, J.

¶1 John W. Keeney was committed as a sexually violent predator (SVP). He asserts that the SVP statute is unconstitutionally vague, that his right to a unanimous jury verdict was violated, and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the SVP commitment hearing because Mr. Keeney was unlawfully imprisoned at the time.

¶2 Mere uncertainty is insufficient to establish that a statute is unconstitutionally vague. And our Supreme Court has rejected a general claim that the SVP statute is unconstitutionally vague. Specifically, we hold RCW 71-.09.020(7) to be constitutional and we reject…

2Cases cited54 opinions

  1. Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Jurek v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Matter of Personal Restraint of YoungWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  4. City of Spokane v. DouglassWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Hubbart v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. In re the Detention of TicesonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
  2. In re the Detention of McGaryCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  3. In Re Detention of PouncyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  4. In re the Detention of PouncyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
  5. In Re Detention of CoppinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2010

16 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