Foreign convictions

Washington Supreme Court:

Torts – Plaintiffs in a premises liability case, to prove the cause element of negligence, must prove the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the unsafe condition unless the “reasonable foreseeability” exception applies.  A genuine issue of material fact as to whether the reasonable foreseeability exception applies precludes summary judgement.  A trier of fact could find that allowing customers to help themselves to bulky items stored on high shelves could result in reasonably foreseeable injuries to customers from falling items.  Galassi v. Lowe’s Home Ctrs. LLC, No. 102410-0 (Mar. 13, 2025)

Division II:

Foreign convictions – The holding of Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024) is limited only to the federal Armed Career Criminal Act.  A judge, rather than a jury, may make the determination of whether a prior out-of-state conviction is comparable to a Washington offense.  The state was not obligated to inform the defendant in the charging document that it would seek to have his out-of-state convictions included in his offender score.   State v. Frieday, No. 58467-1-II (Mar. 11, 2025).

Search & Seizure – An affidavit for a search warrant for an illegal cannabis grow need not necessarily include that the officers have checked the legal status of the grow operation and confirmed that the grow operations are not registered with the State.  State v. Le, No. 58336-4-II (Mar. 11, 2025).

(Editor’s note: It’s still a good idea to include this information.)

Division III:

Plea agreements – The State’s unfulfilled promise to return property to the accused in a plea agreement is specifically enforceable within the criminal case.  Allowing the defendant to withdraw his plea is not a just remedy since withdrawal of the guilty plea could cause him to lose the benefit of his bargain.  State v. McManis, No. 39680-1-III (Mar. 11, 2025).

Plea agreements – Although plea agreements are governed by contract law, they also implicate due process and criminal procedure, so not all contract law principles apply.  The contract doctrine of an illusionary promise does not belong in plea agreement jurisprudence.  And mutuality in each clause of a contract is not required when consideration is given for the contract as a whole, as in a plea agreement.  State v. McManis, No. 39680-1-III (Mar. 11, 2025).

Second Amendment – Unlawful Possession of Firearms (UPOF) conviction predicated on a nonviolent felony is not unconstitutional, even when the predicate is Escape from Community Custody on community custody ordered pursuant to a conviction invalidated by Blake.  State v. Olson, No. 39517-1-III (Mar. 11, 2025).

Pro se defendants – In reviewing whether a defendant’s waiver of counsel was knowing, intelligent and voluntary, the appellate court is not limited to the court’s colloquy with the defendant at the time of the waiver, but may review the broader record.  A court need not discuss collateral consequences (with the exception of deportation) with the defendant during the colloquy.  State v. Sochirca, No. 39751-3-III (March 13, 2025).

Animal cruelty – A person may kill a dog that is chasing, biting, injuring or killing domestic animals, pursuant to RCW 16.08.020, but not inflict undue suffering.  State v. Sochirca, No. 39751-3-III (March 13, 2025)