Allingham v. City of Seattle

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the 1987 SRA amendments to the definition of \`[s]ame criminal conduct'\ do not apply to defendant's 1984 and 1986 crimes (quoting Laws of 1987, ch. 456, § 5)
• holding that robbery and kidnapping encompassed the same criminal conduct where the kidnapping charge was raised to the first degree because the kidnapping was committed with intent to commit robbery
• holding that robbery and kidnapping encompassed the same criminal conduct where the kidnapping charge was raised to the first degree because the kidnapping was committed with intent to commit robbery
• holding that the 1987 SRA amendments to the definition of “ ‘[s]ame criminal conduct’ ” do not apply to defendant’s 1984 and 1986 crimes (quoting Laws of 1987, ch. 456, § 5)
• holding 1987 SRA amendments to definition of \`[s]ame criminal conduct'\ not applicable to defendants' 1984 and 1986 offenses
• planning is inherent in the premeditation element of first degree murder, thus may not be used to justify an exceptional sentence for the crime of first degree murder

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).