State v. Friedlund
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtWiggins, J.
¶1 We must determine whether an on-the-record oral ruling may substitute for written findings when a trial court imposes an exceptional sentence — that is, a sentence that is outside the standard sentence range for an offense. We conclude that oral findings do not satisfy the requirements of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (SRA) and remand these matters to the trial court for entry of written findings of fact and conclusions of law (hereinafter written findings). Ch. 9.94A RCW.
¶2 This consolidated appeal consists of two criminal cases. In each case, the jury convicted the defendant and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In re the Personal Restraint of BreedloveWashington Supreme Court · 1999
- State v. MalloryWashington Supreme Court · 1966
- State v. FowlerWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- In re Marriage of WrightWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- State v. BernardWashington Supreme Court · 1966
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- State v. CatesWashington Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. I. N.A.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2019
- State Of Washington, V. Navin Avery MilkoCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2022
- State v. ShemeshCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- Chun Rogers v. Loucinda RushfordCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.