Legal Opinion
State v. Eisenman
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided August 29, 1991No. 24971-1-IPublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtForrest, J.
Martin Eisenman appeals from his conviction of second degree burglary, arguing that the trial court erred in allowing his prior convictions into evidence, and challenging the assessment of costs. We affirm.
Eisenman's assignment of error to the admission of his convictions is based on State v. Burton. Since filing the briefs, Burton has been overruled by State v. Ray, 116 Wn.2d 531, 806 P.2d 1220 (1991). Ray explicitly holds that theft crimes are per se admissible under ER 609(a)(2), hence, Eisenman's convictions were properly admitted.
Applicability of State v. Ray
In his petition for…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Luce v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Dobbert v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Hopt v. People of Territory of UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Fuller v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- State v. GoreWashington Supreme Court · 1984
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- State v. CurryWashington Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. LundyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- State v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
- Utter v. Department of Social & Health ServicesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
- Utter v. STATE, DEPT. OF SOC. & HEALTH SER.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2007
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.