Washington Supreme Court· 7/25/2013

State v. Vasquez

Citations

178 Wash. 2d 1
309 P.3d 318

How courts have described this case

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

holding that “mere possession of forged documents, without evidence of an intent to injure or defraud, cannot sustain a forgery conviction”
concluding that Vasquez's statements to security guard were patently ambiguous and did not support inference of intent to injure or defraud
rejecting the “‘substantial evidence standard in determining the sufficiency of the evidence because it does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt’”
“We have rejected a substantial evidence standard in determining the sufficiency of the evidence because it does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
defendant’s admission to possession of forged documents was equivocal evidence of “intent to injure or defraud”
in forgery cases where the State proved intent to defraud, the defendants “actually demonstrated intent to pass off their forged documents as authentic”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

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

Other cases named State v. Vasquez

147 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.