Washington Supreme Court· 7/14/1983

State v. Latham

Citations

667 P.2d 56
100 Wash. 2d 59
1983 Wash. LEXIS 1648

How courts have described this case

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

noting that use of a peremptory challenge to remove a juror who should have been removed for cause cures the error
disposition of some motions in limine can only be determined at trial; other motions in limine are appropriately the subject of final ruling prior to trial
disposition of some motions in limine can only be determined at trial; other motions in limine are appropriately the subject of final ruling prior to trial
“Because we hold the trial court did not err by refusing petitioner’s challenges for cause, we need not address this issue.”
“Latham has failed to show that the two jurors should have been excused for bias.”
the peremptory challenge \is an important and substantial right which protects a party's constitutional right trial by jury\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cunningham, Dore

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named State v. Latham

34 other CourtListener records share this case 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.