Legal Opinion

State v. Moreno

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 1, 2006No. 55351-8-IPublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCox, J.

¶1 — The constitutional protection against double jeopardy is not offended if the legislature intends cumulative punishments for two or more offenses.1 At issue here is whether the legislature intended to punish separately both felony violation of a no-contact order and third degree assault, where the former crime is based, in part, on the latter. Because legislative intent clearly indicates that separate punishments for violations of these two criminal statutes were intended, we hold that there is no double jeopardy violation. There being no other error requiring reversal, we affirm the…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. State v. CarruthersTennessee Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Harris v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. State v. RussellWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  5. In re the Personal Restraint of OrangeWashington Supreme Court · 2004

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. State v. CalvinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  2. State v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  3. State v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  4. State v. MorenoCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2006
  5. State v. LemingCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2006

12 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