Legal Opinion

State v. Portomene

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided November 27, 1995No. 35063-3-IPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEllington, J.

Vincent V. Portomene, appealing from convictions for felony harassment and witness intimidation, argues that the State’s delay in entering written findings of fact and conclusions of law under CrR 6.1(d) warrants dismissal. We do not agree.

On June 9, 1994, the court found Portomene guilty of seven counts of harassment, two counts of violating a no-contact order and one count of witness intimidation. The State has the burden of presenting findings for entry, 1 but did not prepare written findings until approximately two months after the filing of Appellant’s opening brief.

Delayed entry does…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. FellersCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1984
  2. State v. FisherCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985
  3. State v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1993

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. HeadWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  2. State v. HeadWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. State v. EatonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
  4. State v. VailencourCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
  5. John Mason, V Tatyana MasonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2021

1 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