Legal Opinion
State v. Riofta
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided August 22, 2006No. Nos. 33539-5-II; 33262-1-IIPublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Van Deren, A.C.J.
¶1 Alexander Nam Riofta was convicted for first degree assault with a firearm in November 2000.1 Following conviction, Riofta filed unsuccessful requests with the Pierce County prosecutor and the attorney general under former RCW 10.73.170 (2001) for post-conviction DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) testing of a white hat worn by the shooter.
¶2 In March 2005, the legislature amended RCW 10-.73.1702 to broaden access to postconviction DNA testing. Riofta (1) renewed his request for postconviction DNA testing under amended RCW 10.73.170 and (2) filed a personal restraint petition…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Washington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- State v. RioftaWashington Supreme Court · 2009
- Osborne v. District Attorney's Office for the Third Judicial DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- Gray v. Suttell & AssociatesWashington Supreme Court · 2014
- Morgan v. KingenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
- Morgan v. KingenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.