Legal Opinion

State v. Graciano

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 31, 2013No. 86530-2PublishedCited by 88 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

¶1 We have been asked to resolve conflicting authority on which standard of review applies to a sentencing court’s determination of “same criminal conduct” under RCW 9.94A.589(l)(a). The Court of Appeals, Division Two, reviewed this determination de novo, adopting the reasoning of Division Three in State v. Torngren, 147 Wn. App. 556, 196 P.3d 742 (2008). The court in Torngren acknowledged a long line of precedent stating the proper standard is abuse of discretion but held that a de novo standard “seem[s] more appropriate.” Id. at 562. We disagree. Today, we reaffirm that determinations of…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. State v. PetrichWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  2. State v. HoffmanWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  3. State v. DunawayWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  4. State v. TiliWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. TiliWashington Supreme Court · 1999

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

3Cited by88 opinions

  1. State v. Rattana Keo PhuongCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  2. State v. KloepperCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  3. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2014
  4. State v. BlairWashington Supreme Court · 2018
  5. State Of Washington, Res/cross-app. v. George Donald Hatt, Jr., App/cross-res.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2019

83 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