Legal Opinion

State v. Tandecki

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 2005No. Nos. 75326-1; 75327-0PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 We must decide whether to stop “immediately” is part of the essential elements of the crime of attempting to elude a pursuing police vehicle under RCW 46.61.024. We conclude that it is. We must also decide whether the failure to use the word “immediately” in the charging documents is reversible error in these cases when raised for the first time on appeal. We conclude that it is not.

Chambers, J

12 In each of the two cases before us, the information failed to allege that the defendants failed to stop immediately. In each case, the defendant raised the alleged defect in the charging document…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. KjorsvikWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  2. State v. CalleWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  3. State v. LeachWashington Supreme Court · 1989
  4. Cox v. HeleniusWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  5. State v. AzpitarteWashington Supreme Court · 2000

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. YatesWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  2. State v. YatesWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  3. State v. KorumWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  4. United States v. Nobel J. KellyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
  5. State v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 2005

19 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