Washington Supreme Court· 11/26/2014

State v. Jones

Citations

182 Wash. 2d 1
338 P.3d 278

How courts have described this case

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

explaining State v. Ford, 137 Wn.2d 472, 973 P.2d 452 (1999) (challenge to offender score calculation permitted despite failure to object in trial court)
Because the “no second chance” rule was rooted in judicial economy rather than due process concerns, legislature had authority to enact the statutory remand provision of RCW 9.94A.530(2)
even an unpreserved error can still be asserted on appeal if “the sentence is based on information that is false, lacks a minimum indici[um] of reliability, or is unsupported in the record.”
amended statute is constitutional and 6 No. 34639-1-III State v. Mendez permits all relevant evidence to be considered by sentencing court so as to reflect the offender's actual criminal history, whether at sentencing or resentencing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fairhurst, González, Johnson, Madsen, McCloud, Owens, Stephens, Wiggins

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

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.