Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.


LexisNexis Heads Up For Washington State — 4 Published Opinions Filed


Division Two of the Court of Appeals filed 1 new published opinion and Division Three filed 3 published opinions on Tuesday, March 20, 2012:

Division Two:

State v. Harris
No. 40006-5
(March 20, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 689


Brief: The trial court did not violate double jeopardy by entering convictions of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, money laundering, and solicitation to commit first degree murder in addition to a conviction of leading organized crime. Double jeopardy proscriptions do not apply because (1) the offenses charged are not the same under the "same evidence test" and (2) the legislature indicated its intent for a conviction of leading organized crime to be separate and in addition to its predicate offenses.

Division Three:

1. In re Trust and Estate of Melter / Melter v. Melter
No. 29192-8
(March 20, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 693


Brief: The trial court erred in setting aside the fourth and final will of the decedent and corresponding transfers of assets that effectively disinherited one son (plaintiff) and left nearly all of her estate to her other son (defendant). Although the evidence supports the trial court's findings that the defendant failed to account for, or clearly establish his mother's knowing consent to assets he transferred to himself during her lifetime and that the defendant shared responsibility with the plaintiff for a contentious relationship between the two in which each withheld information from the other about preferential treatment that they were seeking or received under their mother's estate plan, the court's ultimate conclusion of undue influence was not supported by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence, in light of the sustainable findings of the court and supporting evidence-including the court's findings that the decedent had testamentary capacity at the time she signed her fourth will, had reasons for disinheriting the plaintiff and favoring the defendant, and explained her reasons and wishes to an attorney whom the court found to be acting in her interest.

2. State v. Tamblyn
No. 30495-7
(March 20, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 695


Brief: The trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion to suppress evidence discovered during a warrantless search of his vehicle incident to his arrest after he was handcuffed and placed in a patrol car.

3. State v. Winborne
No. 29711-0
(March 20, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 692


Brief: Amendments in 2009 to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (ch. 9.94A RCW) no longer enable a sentencing court to make the form of judgment notation approved in In re Personal Restraint of Brooks, 166 Wn.2d 664 (2009)-directing the Department of Corrections to release an offender from community custody before the date that would exceed the statutory maximum-and thereby ensure the validity of sentence that might otherwise be excessive. In entering the defendant's sentence, the trial court should have reduced the term of community custody imposed as required by RCW 9.94A.701(9).

Tell a Friend About Washington Heads Up -

Pass along this HeadsUp Alert to your colleagues. They can register online to receive the next headsup directly from LexisNexis.

For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions, connect with us through our corporate site.