Washington v. Barry
| Docket Number | 89976-2 |
| Decision Date | 04 June 2015 |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
107 cases
-
Budd v. Kaiser Gypsum Co.
...in whose favor the verdict was returned,’ " we presume prejudice unless the error affirmatively appears harmless. State v. Barry, 183 Wash.2d 297, 303, 352 P.3d 161 (2015) (quoting State v. Wanrow, 88 Wash.2d 221, 237, 559 P.2d 548 (1977) ). " ‘A harmless error is an error which is trivial,......
-
State v. Ray
...whether the trial court's evidentiary error was harmless, applying the nonconstitutional harmless error standard. State v. Barry , 183 Wash.2d 297, 317, 352 P.3d 161 (2015). Case must show a reasonable probability that, absent the error, the outcome of his trial would have been materially a......
-
State v. Loughbom
...Wn.2d at 774. When applying this standard, the court usually measures the strength of the State's evidence of guilt. State v. Barry, 183 Wn.2d 297, 303, 352 P.3d 161 (2015). I will analyze the strength of the State's case against Gregg Loughbom later. On a side note, our Supreme Court, in i......
-
State v. Lee
...error review, reversal is not required when it is clear that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Barry, 183 Wash.2d 297, 302-03, 352 P.3d 161 (2015) (quoting Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18, 24, 87 S.Ct. 824, 17 L.Ed. 2d 705 (1967) ). This is a high standard on whi......
Get Started for Free