Washington Supreme Court· 10/12/1995

State v. Brown

Citations

127 Wash. 2d 749

How courts have described this case

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

holding that following the jury’s inability to agree on a greater charge, “[d]ue to double jeopardy concerns, the defendant cannot be retried on charges greater than the charge for which he was convicted.”
holding that the trial court’s admission of a 911 call recording as an excited utterance was erroneous given that the declarant fabricated a story about being abducted on the call
holding that following the jury’s inability to agree on a greater charge, “[d]ue to double jeopardy concerns, the defendant cannot be retried on charges greater than the charge for which he was convicted.”
refusing to apply the exception when the declarant “had the opportunity to, and did in fact, decide to fabricate a portion of her story”
stating an excited utterance is a \spontaneous and sincere response\ and not based on \reflection or self-interest\
reversing a rape conviction because the trial court erred in giving the lesser included instruction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pekelis

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

35 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

12 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.