Court of Appeals of Washington· 7/27/1999
State v. Johnson
Citations
- 981 P.2d 25
- 96 Wash. App. 813
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- reviewing whether the trial court complied with the requirements of the restitution statutes de novo
- reviewing whether the trial court complied with the requirements of the restitution statutes de novo
- trial court does not have statutory authority to order restitution hearing beyond 180 day time limit
- Superior court lacked statutory authority to grant continuance when the motion was made after the expiration of 180-day statutory limit for setting restitution.
- “it would be illogical to allow consideration of a continuance that is raised after the time limit has expired”
- the choice, interpretation, and application of law are matters of law reviewed de novo
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Brown
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
30 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. GrayWashington Supreme Court· 2012-07-19· cited 72×
- In re the Marriage of PennamenCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2006-11-06· cited 47×
- In Re Marriage of PennamenCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2006-11-06· cited 45×
- State v. SaundersCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2006-03-27· cited 36×
- State v. AcevedoCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2010-12-09· cited 33×
- State v. SaundersCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2006-04-24· cited 31×
- State v. HalseyCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2007-08-23· cited 28×
- State v. DennisCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2000-03-27· cited 28×
- State v. DennisCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2000-08-14· cited 26×
- State v. LawCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2002-01-17· cited 25×
- State v. PradoCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2008-04-29· cited 21×
- State v. WhelchelCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1999-11-04· cited 16×
- State v. TetreaultCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2000-02-22· cited 15×
- State v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2002-05-09· cited 14×
- State v. GranthamCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2013-04-16· cited 14×
- State v. PietrzakCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2000-04-13· cited 12×
- State v. OsborneCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2007-08-07· cited 12×
- Lund v. BenhamCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2001-11-20· cited 8×
- Basin Paving Co. v. Contractors Bonding & InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2004-09-21· cited 8×
- State v. ChipmanCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2013-09-10· cited 8×
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. LordWashington Supreme Court· 1992-02-07· cited 447×
- Walker v. MunroWashington Supreme Court· 1994-08-29· cited 175×
- State v. DavisonWashington Supreme Court· 1991-05-16· cited 161×
- State v. MoenWashington Supreme Court· 1996-07-18· cited 159×
- State v. KrallWashington Supreme Court· 1994-10-20· cited 139×
- State v. HenningsWashington Supreme Court· 1996-07-18· cited 101×
- State v. DearboneWashington Supreme Court· 1994-11-03· cited 56×
- State v. TomalWashington Supreme Court· 1997-12-24· cited 35×
- State v. MartinWashington Supreme Court· 1999-01-07· cited 18×
- Clark v. FallingCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1998-10-19· cited 15×
- State v. NicholsonCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1996-11-01· cited 9×
- State v. DubackCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1995-03-23· cited 9×
- State v. CrumptonCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1998-02-06· cited 9×
- State v. CrumptonCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1998-03-20· cited 5×
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.