Legal Opinion

State v. Jeannotte

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1997No. 65169-8PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTalmadge, J.

— We are asked to determine if a trial court may impose an exceptional sentence below the standard range on the basis of a failed defense when the jury has explicitly rejected such defense in rendering its verdict. We hold the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (SRA), RCW 9.94A, explicitly authorizes a trial court to treat a failed defense as a mitigating factor supporting an exceptional sentence below the standard range. We affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals with respect to Jean*849notte’s convictions, but reverse the sentencing aspect of the Court of Appeals’ decision, reinstating the trial…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. State v. NordbyWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  2. State v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court · 1981
  3. Seattle-First National Bank v. Shoreline Concrete Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1978
  4. State v. LivelyWashington Supreme Court · 1996
  5. State v. BranchWashington Supreme Court · 1996

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

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. State v. BurkinsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1999
  2. In Re Detention of HalgrenWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  3. State v. JeannotteWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  4. In re the Detention of HalgrenWashington Supreme Court · 2006
  5. State v. FergusonWashington Supreme Court · 2001

40 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