Williams v. Department of Licensing

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that officer's statement to another that he smelled alcohol on the breath of the defendant was not offered to prove the truth of the matter, but to show why the officer then requested the defendant to perform a Breathalyzer test, and was not inadmissible hearsay
• holding that officer’s statement to another that he smelled alcohol on the breath of the defendant was not offered to prove the truth of the matter, but to show why the officer then requested the defendant to perform a Breathalyzer test, and was not inadmissible hearsay
• Department of Licensing revocation of driver’s license pursuant to implied consent statute, RCW 46.20.308, was not penal in nature and therefore did not violate double jeopardy where driver had already been punished in federal court
• statement a military gate guard made to a police officer that the defendant smelled like alcohol gave a basis for the officer to detain the defendant for further investigation, was not offered for truth of the matter asserted, and was therefore admissible
• a statement by a military gate guard to a security officer that the defendant smelled of alcohol was not offered for its truth but rather as a basis to show why the officer detained the defendant for further investigation
• statement a military gate guard made to a police officer that the defendant smelled like alcohol gave a basis for the officer to detain the defendant for further investigation, was not offered for truth of the matter asserted, and was therefore admissible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).