Washington Supreme Court· 3/1/2000

State v. Curry

Citations

829 P.2d 166
118 Wash. 2d 911

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 imposition of costs is within the sentencing court’s discretion
holding that the imposition of costs is within the sentencing court’s discretion
noting mandatory LFOs are constitutional so long as “there are sufficient safeguards in the current sentencing scheme to prevent imprisonment of indigent defendants”
rejecting as premature a challenge to the imposition of a victim penalty assessment
rejecting, as premature, a challenge to the imposition of a victim penalty assessment
\no defendant will be incarcerated for his or her inability to pay the penalty assessment unless the violation is willful\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Durham

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

13 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.