Skip to main content

State v. Conklin

Citations

  • 489 P.2d 1130
  • 79 Wash. 2d 805
  • 1971 Wash. LEXIS 653

How courts have described this case

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

  • voluntary intoxication defense instruction was required where supported by evidence; instruction that “intent to defraud” was a necessary element was insufficient
  • prejudicial error to exclude corroborative testimony of the defendant’s intoxication at the time of the alleged forgery, supporting defendant’s theory that he was unable to form the specific intent to commit the offense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Neill

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

11 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.