State v. Heredia-Juarez

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that prosecutor's vacation warranted continuance, and that reassignment to an available prosecutor was not necessary
• valid continuance granted to accommodate prosecutor' s reasonably scheduled vacation
• prosecutor's 5 At oral argument, Rhodes argued CrR 3.3(f)(2) allows a trial continuance but does not permit the trial court to extend the time-to-trial deadline. We disagree with this assertion. CrR 3.3(e)(3) clearly excludes delays granted by a court under CrR 3.3(f

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Flinn
  Washington Supreme Court· 2005-04-28· cited 68×
• State v. Chichester
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2007-10-29· cited 17×
• State v. HEREDIAJUAREZ
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2003-11-17
• State Of Washington v. Arvell L. Kindell
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2014-06-17

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Cannon
  Washington Supreme Court· 1996-09-19· cited 93×
• State v. Carson
  Washington Supreme Court· 1996-03-14· cited 74×
• State v. Kelley
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1992-01-27· cited 35×
• State v. Williams
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2001-01-26· cited 29×
• State v. Williams
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2001-04-13· cited 28×
• State v. Torres
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2002-04-23· cited 21×
• State v. Selam
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1999-08-24· cited 13×
• State v. Teems
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1997-12-30· cited 9×
• State v. Angulo
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1993-04-12· cited 9×