Skip to main content

State v. Barton

Citations

  • 181 Wash. 2d 148
  • 331 P.3d 50

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that, under Washington “sufficient sureties” clause, “‘surety’ contemplates a third-party arrangement as, distinguished from the accused depositing cash or property directly with the court.”
  • holding that a cash-only bail order that “excluded a surety bond . . . was . . . contrary to article I, section 20” of the Washington Constitution
  • examining the 1891 definition of “surety” in the first sentence of article I, section 20

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McCloud, Stephens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.