Legal Opinion
In Re the Personal Restraint of Sinka
Washington Supreme Court
Decided September 6, 1979No. 46016PublishedCited by 46 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrachtenbach, J.
Two prison inmates, Sinka and Rowe, by personal restraint petitions present the issue whether they are entitled to procedural due process in the setting of their minimum prison terms by the Board of Prison Terms and Paroles (Parole Board). We hold that petitioners are entitled to minimal due process and that the procedures used by the Parole Board to set minimum terms generally provide the process due.
I
Petitioner Sinka pleaded guilty to a charge of carnal knowledge of his stepdaughter and was sentenced by the trial court to a 20-year maximum term. The sentencing judge recommended an 18-month…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Morrissey v. BrewerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Meachum v. FanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- State v. AmmonsWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- Nguyen v. STATE HEALTH MED. QUALITY ASSUR.Washington Supreme Court · 2001
- In the Matter of Personal Restraint of PowellWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- In Re the Personal Restraint of JamesWashington Supreme Court · 1982
- In Re the Personal Restraint of MyersWashington Supreme Court · 1986
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.