Legal Opinion

State v. Nolan

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 14, 2000No. 69046-4PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTalmadge, J.

— We determine in this case if RCW 10.73.160, which authorizes recovery from an unsuccessful appellant the costs for publicly paid appellate counsel under Title 14 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, is confined to cases where the criminal defendant’s appeal is frivolous. We hold RCW 10.73.160 is not confined to frivolous appeals. Under the statute, an appellate court has the discretion to impose the expense of a criminal defendant’s publicly paid appellate counsel as a recoverable item of cost if the State is the substantially prevailing party on appeal. We affirm the decision of the Court…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. People v. NichollsIllinois Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Harrigan v. GilchristWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Western Telepage, Inc. v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Western Telepage, Inc. v. City of Tacoma Department of FinancingWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  5. State v. BlankWashington Supreme Court · 1997

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. State v. NolanWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  2. State v. BeasleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  3. State v. BeasleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  4. State v. StumpWashington Supreme Court · 2016
  5. State v. RamirezCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007

26 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