Legal Opinion

State v. Richmond

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 5, 1984No. 49688-9PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUtter, J.

The State filed this appeal asking for reversal of a trial court ruling that the criminal nonsupport statute, RCW 26.20.030(l)(b), is unconstitutionally vague. We agree with the trial judge that the statute is unconstitutionally vague under the due process clause of U.S. Const. amend. 14 because the "without lawful excuse" element has not been sufficiently clarified by statute or case authority. This holding is consistent with two recent rulings of this court which criticized the lack of constitutionally required precision in the words "lawful excuse." Accordingly, we affirm.

Respondent, Byron…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Kolender v. LawsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. United States v. REESESupreme Court of the United States · 1876
  4. State v. WhiteWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  5. Wainwright v. StoneSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. City of Spokane v. DouglassWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  2. State v. HalstienWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  3. City of Seattle v. EzeWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  4. State v. EvansWashington Supreme Court · 2013
  5. State v. CarverWashington Supreme Court · 1990

33 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