State v. Armendariz
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
¶1 The Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (SRA), chapter 9.94A RCW, authorizes trial courts to impose crime-related prohibitions1 as part of defendants’ sentences.2 We conclude that, as part of any felony sentence, such crime-related prohibitions may include orders prohibiting contact with victims or witnesses for the statutory maximum term. Thus, we hold that the trial court in the present case did not abuse its discretion in imposing a five-year no-contact order as part of petitioner Ismael Armendariz’s sentence for third-degree assault.3
J.M. Johnson, J.
Facts and Procedural History
¶2 In November…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- State v. J.P.Washington Supreme Court · 2003
- Cockle v. Dept. of Labor and IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- Cockle v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 2001
- State v. RileyWashington Supreme Court · 1993
- Port of Seattle v. Pollution Control Hearings BoardWashington Supreme Court · 2004
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by309 opinions
- State v. WarrenWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. WarrenWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- Lake v. Woodcreek Homeowners Ass'nWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. GonzalezWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. GonzalezWashington Supreme Court · 2010
304 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.