Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Allen

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 27, 2009No. 36868-4-IIPublished

1ConcurrenceHoughton, J.

¶35 (concurring) — I concur but write separately to explain my departure from my agreement with State v. Madrid, 145 Wn. App. 106, 192 P.3d 909 (2008) . As the majority notes, “[D]ifferent panels of our court have held that former RCW 26.50.110(1) [(2006)] is unambiguous and that a no-contact order violation is not a criminal offense unless the violation was one for which an arrest is required under RCW 10.31.100(2).” Majority at 308 n.1. I served on one of those panels, concurring in Madrid. In State v. Wofford, 148 Wn. App. 870, 201 P.3d 389 (2009) , I wrote a separate concurrence…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. State v. GoreWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Rozner v. City of BellevueWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Berrocal v. FernandezWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Berrocal v. FernandezWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  5. State v. ChapmanWashington Supreme Court · 2000

24 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