Washington Supreme Court· 1/6/2005

State v. Willis

Citations

103 P.3d 1213

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the jury need not be specifically instructed to find whether there is a connection between the defendant, the weapon, and the crime
holding that the jury need not be specifically instructed to find whether there is a connection between the defendant, the weapon, and the crime
holding that the jury instructions need not contain \[e]xpress `nexus' language\
stating that in Schelin “[w]e .. . held that there must be a nexus between the defendant, the crime, and the deadly weapon in order to find that the defendant was ‘armed’ under the deadly weapon enhancement statute”
finding sufficient evidence when circumstantial evidence suggests firearm was handled during burglary
statute provided that firearm enhancement could be imposed if the jury found that “the defendant or an accomplice” was armed, but under law of the case doctrine, unchallenged jury instruction omitting “or an accomplice” compelled State to prove that defendant himself was armed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Madsen

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

12 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.