Today's arguments - March 17, 2011

Posted on March 17, 2011 by Michael Reitz

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in four cases today. (Docket, Briefs)

In the morning, beginning at 9:00 a.m.

Mellish v. Frog Mountain Pet Care, No. 84246-9. Whether the time limit for filing a land use petition is tolled by a motion for reconsideration. Martin Mellish and Frog Mountain Pet Care are neighbors. Mellish opposed Frog MountainÂ’'s application for a conditional use permit to expand their pet boarding facility. A Jefferson County hearing examiner granted the permit to Frog Mountain and Mellish filed a motion for reconsideration. The motion was denied.

Mellish filed a land use petition within 21 days after the denial. He argues that the time limit for filing started when his motion was denied. Frog Mountain argues the time limit began to run at the original decision.

State v. Gresham, No. 84148-9. Michael Gresham was convicted in Snohomish County Superior Court on multiple counts of first degree child molestation. Under RCW 10.58.090 the state can, and it did in Gresham's trial, present evidence of past sex offenses. Gresham argues the statute is unconstitutional as it conflicts with evidence rule 404(b). He also argues that the statute is ex post facto law, as it was passed after he had committed the offense. The appellate court recently held that the statue does not change the necessary facts or the burden of proof.

In the afternoon, beginning at 1:30 p.m.

State v. Anderson, No. 84066-1. The question here is whether statements from a child made during his medical investigation were testimonial.

Jeremy Anderson was convicted of child molestation in Mason County. During the trial, the state presented evidence of two earlier uncharged sex offenses. A nurse had given a medical exam to one of the victims and later testified at trial about statements made by the child during the exam. The child did not actually testify. Anderson argues that the child's statements are testimonial hearsay. The state argues that statements were made during a medical exam are not testimonial.

In re PRP Carrier, No. 83377-0. Whether a conviction dismissed after probation, before the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA), should be counted as part of a defendant's criminal history.

Henry Carrier was convicted of indecent liberties and successfully served out his probation after which his conviction was dismissed, this was allowed before the state adopted the SRA. Recently he was convicted of child molestation and the court counted his prior conviction in his criminal history. Carrier argues that as his conviction had been dismissed it should not be counted against him in his current sentencing. He is seeking relief from the Superior Court's sentencing.

Tags: , , , ,

New cases accepted for review

Posted on June 8, 2010 by Michael Reitz

The Supreme Court accepted petitions for review in several cases during its conference last week.

  • Bank of America v. Owens, No. 84044-0
  • State v. Gresham, No. 84148-9
  • State v. Scherner, No. 84150-1
  • In re Det. of Danforth, No. 84152-7
  • Neighborhood Alliance of Spokane County v. County of Spokane, No. 84108-0
  • Kaltreider v. Lake Chelan Cmty. Hosp., No. 84144-6
  • Federal Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. Vinson, No. 84243-4
  • State v. Grogan, No. 82609-9

Bank of America v. Owens, No. 84044-0. The payee of a promissory note brings a declaratory action against the maker and her ex-husband to determine priority of parties' claims to funds from sale of real property.

State v. Gresham, No. 84148-9 and State v. Scherner, No. 84150-1 are consolidated to address whether RCW 10.58.090. Generally speaking, the state’s rules of evidence prohibit the use of evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts as proof of a defendant’s propensity to commit similar actions. Nevertheless, RCW 10.58.090 permits the admission of evidence of a defendant’s past sex offenses in a criminal sex offense action. Two criminal defendants have challenged the law as unconstitutional.

In re Det. of Danforth, No. 84152-7. The state filed petition seeking to civilly commit sex offender as a sexually violent predator. The offender argued his plea to law enforcement officials seeking help from reoffending did not constitute a recent overt act warranting commitment. The superior court denied the offender’s motion and the Court of Appeals affirmed the civil commitment.

Neighborhood Alliance of Spokane County v. County of Spokane, No. 84108-0. A nonprofit group request public records from Spokane County. The trial judge denied the group’s request for discovery and granted summary judgment to the county. On appeal, the Court of Appeals ruled that the county had violated the Public Records Act by failing to conduct a reasonably adequate search for responsive records, but that the organization’s request for discovery went far beyond the issue of whether a reasonably adequate search for documents had taken place.

Kaltreider v. Lake Chelan Cmty. Hosp., No. 84144-6. Elizabeth Kaltreider was a voluntary resident at Lake Chelan Community Hospital for inpatient treatment of alcohol dependency. During her stay she engaged in sexual acts with a nurse. Kaltreider sued the hospital and the nurse, claiming in part that the hospital breached its duty to protect her from sexual misconduct. The trial court ruled against her. The Court of Appeals held that Kaltreider was not a vulnerable adult and thus the hospital did not have a duty to protect her against the actions of a third party, and that the nurse’s actions with the patient were not foreseeable, and thus the hospital did not have a duty to protect the patient against actions of a third party.

Federal Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. Vinson, No. 84243-4. David Vinson, a teacher at Federal Way High School, was accused of verbally harassing a student. Vinson later admitted lying during the human resources investigation. The school district terminated Vinson, citing his behavior and the dishonesty during the course of the investigation. A hearing officer ruled in Vinson’s favor, and a superior court affirmed the decision, ordering the district to pay Vinson’s attorneys fees. The Court of Appeals held the teacher's conduct in lying during an official school district investigation of professional misconduct was sufficient cause for termination.

State v. Grogan, No. 82609-9. Review granted and remanded to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of State v. Dow, No. 81243-8.
 
Tags: , , , , , , ,