Court of Appeals of Washington· 12/29/2003

State v. Kinneman

Citations

120 Wash. App. 327
84 P.3d 882

How courts have described this case

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

state had discretionary authority to charge separate count oftheft for each unauthorized withdraw from trust account; defendant not subject to double jeopardy for 67 theft convictions where each was based on a discrete act
State properly charged 28 counts of first degree theft and 39 counts of second degree theft based on 67 unauthorized withdrawals from trust account, diverting a total of over $200,000 to defendant's own use
“The aggregation cases permit, but do not require, the State to aggregate charges in order to charge a defendant with a higher degree of a crime when the State believes a single scheme can be proved.”
“‘[i]n a case where the nature of the appeal is clear and the relevant issues are argued in the body of the brief . . . , there is no compelling reason for the appellate court not to exercise its discretion to consider the merits of the case or issue.’” (first alteration in original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Appelwick, Ellington

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.