In re Dependency of C.R.B., 62 Wn. App. 608, 814 P.2d 1197 (1991) (reversed order terminating client’s parental rights)

 

State v. Bone-Club, 128 Wn.2d 254, 906 P.2d 325 (1995) (improper for the trial court to order closure of a pretrial suppression hearing without weighing mandatory criteria)

 

State v. Easter, 130 Wn.2d 228, 922 P.2d 1285 (1996) (defendant's conviction for vehicular assault was not proper where at trial the state introduced evidence of defendant's pre-arrest silence and referred to silence in closing arguments to the jury)

 

State v. Warden, 133 Wn.2d 559, 947 P.2d 708 (1997) (murder conviction reversed where trial court failed to instruct jury on lesser included offense)

 

State v. Hairychin, 136 Wn.2d 862, 968 P.2d 410 (1998)  (juvenile defendant's conviction for second degree assault reversed where prosecution, in failing to make any effort to serve the victim with a subpoena, did not exercise the due diligence required for a continuance).

 

State v Cloud, 95 Wn. App. 606, 976 P.2d 649 (1999) (murder conviction reversed due to trial counsel’s ineffective assistance)

 

State v. Rivers, 96 Wn. App. 672, 981 P.2d 16 (1999) (conviction reversed where prosecutor referred to defendant's character witnesses who came from the jail as "the pajama crowd")

 

State v. Schwab, 98 Wn. App. 179, 988 P.2d 1045 (1999)  (convictions for both felony murder and manslaughter violated appellant's double jeopardy rights because there was no statutory evidence that the state legislature intended multiple punishments for one homicide)

 

In re Pers. Restraint of Hopkins, 137 Wn.2d 897, 976 P.2d 616 (1999)  (sentence doubling statute did not apply, either directly or indirectly, to convert the statutory maximum for petitioner's conviction for solicitation to deliver cocaine from 5 years to 10 years)

 

State v. Cruz, 139 Wn.2d 186, 985 P.2d 384 (1999) (third strike sentence reversed where one of the prior strikes “washed out” before statutory amendment changed the rules)

 

State v. Avila-Avina, 99 Wn. App. 9, 991 P.2d 720 (2000)  (Denial of defendant's motion to suppress reversed; scope of defendant's detention unreasonably exceeded its initial purpose and State failed to prove that police inevitably would have obtained the evidence through independent legal means)

 

State v. Irons, 101 Wn. App. 544, 4 P.3d 174 (2000)  (trial court erred by giving a self-defense instruction that precluded the jury from considering appellant's right to act upon reasonable appearances in a multiple assailant attack)

 

 State v. B.A.S.,  103 Wn. App. 549, 13 P.3d 244 (2000) (search of student was illegal; school official's suspicion that student violated a closed campus rule did not provide reasonable grounds for search and there was no reason to suspect that the student had illegal drugs)

 

State v. Cronin, 142 Wn.2d 568, 14 P.3d 752 (2000) (standard pattern jury instruction on accomplice liability misstates the law; conviction for first-degree assault reversed)

 

State v. Marshall, 144 Wn.2d 266, 27 P.3d 192 (2001) (sentence reversed in death penalty case)

 

State v. Franks, 105 Wn. App. 950, 22 P.3d 269 (2001) (information violated robbery defendant's constitutional right to be informed of the charges against her where the charging language accused a different person, even though the information named defendant in the caption)

 

State v. Atherton, 106 Wn. App. 783, 24 P.3d 1123 (2001) (record did not support trial court's finding that defendant, who did not appear for the last day of trial because he had been incarcerated on an unrelated charge, voluntarily waived his right to be present at trial)

 

Josephinium Assocs. v. Kahli, 111 Wn. App. 617, 45 P.3d 627 (2002) (first case in Washington recognizing disability discrimination as a valid defense to an unlawful detainer action)

 

State v. Kypreos, 115 Wn. App. 207, 61 P.3d 352 (2002) (improper warrantless search of trailer; conviction for unlawful possession of firearm reversed)

 

State v. Clausing, 147 Wn.2d 620, 56 P.3d 550 (2002) (improper jury instructions relieved State of its burden of proof and court improperly admitted legal opinion testimony)

In re Williams, 147 Wash.2d 476, 55 P.3d 597 (2002)  (CR 35 does not apply to mental examination by the State's experts of a person alleged to be a sexually violent predator)

 

United States v. Gunning, 339 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2003) (federal wire fraud conviction; case remanded to consider reduced sentence; restitution improperly delegated to probation officer)

 

State v. Delgado, 148 Wn.2d 723, 63 P.3d 792 (2003) (defendant’s prior conviction improperly treated as a strike offense under Washington’s “2 strikes and you’re out” law; sentence of life in prison reversed)

 

State v. Tilton, 149 Wn.2d 775, 72 P.3d 735 (2003) (portion of trial not recorded, leaving incomplete record for appeal; conviction reversed and case remanded for new trial)

 

United States v. Howard, 381 F.3d 873 (9th Cir. 2004) (multiple convictions for federal drug offenses; denial of Habeas Corpus reversed where credible evidence showed defendant incompetent to plead guilty and defense counsel ineffective for allowing him to do so)

 

State v. Rankin, 151 Wn.2d 689, 699, 92 P.3d 202 (2004) (Washington constitution prohibits police from requiring car passenger to show identification)

 

State v. Arth, 121 Wn. App. 205, 87 P.3d 1206  (2004)  (Self-defense statute applies to a charge of malicious mischief when the property damaged was used to threaten the accused with bodily harm)

 

State v. Holmes, 122 Wn. App. 438, 93 P.3d 212 (2004) (police officer improperly commented on defendant’s silence during trial testimony; convictions reversed)

 

State v. Heaven, 127 Wn. App. 156, 110 P.3d 835 (2005) (State’s motion to re-try Heaven on one count of child molestation was properly denied on double jeopardy grounds)

 

In re Restraint of Cadwallader, 155 Wn.2d 867, 123 P.3d 456 (2005) (third strike sentence reversed; court clarified the State’s duty to prove criminal history in guilty plea context)

 

State v. Elmore, 155 Wn.2d 758, 123 P.3d 72 (2005) (“12 Angry Men” case; murder conviction reversed where trial court improperly dismissed a deliberating juror)

 

State v. Bisson, 156 Wn.2d 507, 130 P.3d 820 (2005)  (plea agreement was ambiguous as to whether defendant's five weapon enhancements were to be served consecutively to, or concurrently with, one another)

 

State v. Linton, 156 Wn.2d 777, 132 P.3d 127 (2006) (State’s motion to re-try defendant for first degree assault was properly denied on double jeopardy grounds where the jury convicted him of the lesser included offense of second degree assault, but was unable to agree on the higher charge)

 

State v. Leyda, 157 Wn.2d 335,  138 P.3d 610 (2006) (conviction for four counts of identity theft violated defendant’s double jeopardy rights when he stole a single victim's credit card)

 

In re Dependency of V.R.R., 134 Wn. App. 573, 141 P.3d 85 (2006) (reversed order terminating client’s parental rights)

 

State v. Pittman, 134 Wn. App. 376, 166 P.3d 720 (2006) (ineffective assistance of counsel where trial attorney failed to request an instruction on attempted criminal trespassing as a lesser included offense in burglary case)

 

State v. Veltri, 136 Wn. App. 818, 150 P.3d 1178 (2007) (police conduct unconstitutional general search of defendant’s car; evidence properly suppressed and drug charge properly dismissed)

 

State v. Varnell, 162 Wn.2d 165, 170 P.3d 24 (2007) (reversed three convictions for solicitation to commit murder; “unit of prosecution” is the inducement, not the number of contemplated victims)

 

In re Dependency of T.L.G., 139 Wn. App. 1; 156 P.3d 222 (2007) (in a child dependency proceeding, it is error to deny or reduce parent-child visitation absent a showing visitation is harmful to the child; visitation may not be used to entice parents to comply with court ordered services)

 

In re Pers. Restraint of Mulholland, 161 Wn.2d 322, 166 P.3d 677 (2007) (sentencing court has discretion to override presumptive consecutive sentences for multiple serious violent offenses under RCW 9.94A.589 with a mitigated exceptional sentence when circumstances warrant)

 

State v. O'Cain, 144 Wn. App. 772, 184 P.3d 1262 (2008) (community custody condition prohibiting Internet access without prior approval held invalid where there was no evidence Internet use contributed to the crime of conviction)

 

State v. Knight, 162 Wn.2d 806, 174 P.3d 1167 (2008) (reversed sentence; double jeopardy protections apply in context of plea bargain)

 

State v. Hicks/Babbs, 163 Wn.2d 477, 181 P.3d 831 (2008) (prosecution’s exclusion of the lone African American juror from a jury pool can establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution)

 

State v. Xiong, 164 Wn.2d 506, 191 P.3d 1278 (2008) (officers may not frisk a suspect without reasonable suspicion to believe he is armed and presently dangerous)

 

State v. Kier, ___ Wn.2d ___, 2008 LEXIS 1030 (filed 10/9/08) (convictions for assault and robbery violate double jeopardy; assault conviction, 63-month sentence, and 3-year deadly weapon enhancement vacated)

 

State v. Bahl, ___ Wn.2d ___, 2008 Wash. LEXIS 1032 (filed 10/9/08) (defendant is entitled to bring a pre-enforcement vagueness challenge to conditions of community custody imposed as part of his sentence; court holds several of the conditions are unconstitutionally vague)

State v. Garcia, __ Wn. App. __, 193 P.3d 181 (9/23/08 2008)  (absent an established agency relationship with store at which suspected shoplifting occurred, security guard from neighboring store lacks "lawful authority" to detain suspected shoplifter and therefore an alleged assault of security guard from neighboring store in attempt to flee detention is insufficient to prosecute for third degree assault and constitutes fourth degree assault, at most)

 

State v. Davis, __ Wn. App . __, 192 P.3d 29 (9/15/08)  (when combined term of standard range community custody and confinement under the SRA exceeds the statutory maximum term for the offense, the sentencing court may impose a mitigated exceptional sentence, as a matter of law)