Legal Opinion

State v. Aho

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 22, 1999No. 65656-8PublishedCited by 109 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, J.

Petitioner was convicted of three counts of first degree child molestation and one count of rape of a child. He claims his convictions for child molestation violate ex post facto prohibitions because the statute under which he was charged and under which the jury was instructed did not take effect until approximately a year and a half after the beginning of the charging period. We agree that those convictions must be reversed and this matter remanded on the ground that the convictions violate due process.

FACTS

The charges against Fonua Aho were based upon conduct alleged to have occurred…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Marks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
  5. Marks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by109 opinions

  1. State v. GrierWashington Supreme Court · 2011
  2. State v. KylloWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  3. State v. KylloWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State v. ReichenbachWashington Supreme Court · 2004
  5. State v. ReichenbachWashington Supreme Court · 2004

104 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