State of Washington v. Joshua James Clark
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtKorsmo, J.
¶1 — Joshua Clark challenges the timeliness of his trial for possession of a stolen motor vehicle and the court’s imposition of legal financial obligations. Addressing the latter issue in the published portion of this opinion, we conclude that a fine is not a “court cost” that is subject to challenge initially on appeal. The conviction and judgment are affirmed.
FACTS
¶2 Mr. Clark was charged with possessing a stolen vehicle that he previously had owned. The vehicle had been impounded in late 2013 and eventually sold after it went unclaimed at the impound lot. The new owner reported the vehicle…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Carroll v. JunkerWashington Supreme Court · 1971
- State v. BlazinaWashington Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. LundyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- State v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
- State v. BertrandCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- State v. MathersCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- State v. GloverCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
- State Of Washington v. Jason SpauldingCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020
- State of Washington v. Francisco Gonzalez-GonzalezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- State Of Washington v. Joshua J. ClarkCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.