Legal Opinion

In Re the Personal Restraint of Scott

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 1, 2012No. 82951-9PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChambers, J.

¶1 In the wake of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531, 159 L. Ed. 2d 403 (2004), we held that a trial judge lacked the authority to impose a firearm enhancement based on a jury’s deadly weapon special verdict. State v. Recuenco, 163 Wn.2d 428, 442, 180 P.3d 1276 (2008) (Recuenco III). We now must decide whether a court may refer to verdict forms to determine whether a judgment and sentence is valid on its face and thus not subject to collateral attack under RCW 10.73.090 and whether Recuenco III applies retroactively to cases that were final when it was announced. We conclude…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Neder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
  4. Schriro v. SummerlinSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  5. Washington v. RecuencoSupreme Court of the United States · 2006

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. In re the Personal Restraint of StockwellWashington Supreme Court · 2014
  2. In re the Personal Restraint of HaghighiWashington Supreme Court · 2013
  3. In re the Personal Restraint of GentryWashington Supreme Court · 2014
  4. In re the Personal Restraint of SnivelyWashington Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Personal Restraint Petition Of Arthur Lewis DoveCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016

14 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