Court of Appeals of Washington· 4/21/2009

State v. Toney

Citations

205 P.3d 944

How courts have described this case

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

affirming defendant’s sentence under RCW 9A.20.021 even though it exceeded the high end of the standard range under the SRA
“Toney’s sentence was not final because our remand did not limit the trial court to making a ministerial correction.”
defendant could not raise double jeopardy and sentence issues in second appeal following remand because remand was for ministerial corrections
when an appellate court remands only for a ministerial correction, the trial court lacks discretion to conduct a full resentencing
defendant was entitled to raise new sentencing issues on a second appeal “if, on the first appeal, the appellate court vacates the original sentence or remands for an entirely new sentencing proceeding . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Armstrong

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

21 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.