State v. Schmeling
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtMaxa, J.
¶1 — Richard Schmeling appeals his conviction under RCW 69.50.4013 for possession of a controlled substance. He argues that RCW 69.50.4013 is unconstitutional as applied under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and under the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause because the statute makes possession of very small amounts of a controlled substance a felony without requiring a culpable mental state, i.e., knowledge of possession or intent to possess. We disagree. In the unpublished portion of this opinion, we reject Schmeling’s additional arguments. Accordingly, we affirm…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Solem v. HelmSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Harmelin v. MichiganSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Roper v. SimmonsSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Graham v. FloridaSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Rummel v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- State v. BlakeWashington Supreme Court · 2021
- State v. A.M.Washington Supreme Court · 2019
- State Of Washington v. Brian M. BassettCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
- State Of Washington, V. Christopher Lee OlsenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2023
- City Of Seattle v. Jose RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.