I am getting this message for my multi quote responses...
Redirecting...

Thank you for your posting! Your post will be not be visible until a moderator has approved it for posting. You will now be taken back to the forum. If you opted to post a poll, you will now be allowed to do so.
I have posted responses to searcher and flyingron, but my response posts have been routed through moderators for review, this has been happening since early this morning when I tired to post a lengthy response to flyingrons last post.

Sorry you can't see my responses yet, I guess you may never actually see them? Thanks for the replies, keep em coming. You can message me with any questions or I will message you my responses. Any examples of appeal briefs for such a situation would be helpful.

Quote Quoting zeljo
View Post
Also from Leach: "[1] In holding that a charging document which omits a statutory element of the crime charged violates a defendant's constitutional rights, the court in Holt did not distinguish between misdemeanors and felonies, nor between complaints and citations. In applying the Holt rule, there is no logical reason to distinguish between complaints and citations or felonies and misdemeanors. If a misdemeanor citation or complaint omits a statutory element of the charged offense, the document is constitutionally defective for failure to state an offense and is subject to dismissal. "
Yes, I based my argument on this for application. The Judge did not seem to grasp this concept, and appeared to completely ignore irlj2.1 b4 all together.

A constitutional right to due process does not override this particular judges idea of judicial discretion and prosecutorial behavior.

Quote Quoting searcher99
View Post
I can offer some thoughts, but have no experience with appeals and cannot assess your chances. If you haven’t already, you would definitely want to read the entire Washington State Rules for Appeal of Decisions of Courts of Limited Jurisdiction. I know it will involve some expense including the filing fee and cost to order a transcript. Also it will cost you time to write and research. The whole process would best be viewed as an adventure and learning experience, and if you choose to proceed I would encourage you to share on this forum regardless of outcome.

So far , this looks about right.

RALJ RULE 2.2 (d)(3)

(3) manifest error affecting a constitutional right. A party may present a ground
for affirming a decision of a court of limited jurisdiction that was not presented to that court if the record
has been sufficiently developed to fairly consider the ground. A party may raise a claim of error that was
not raised by the party in the court of limited jurisdiction if another party on the same side of the case
raised the claim of error in that court.
Manifest constitutional error refers to an error made by the trial court which has an identifiably negative impact on the trial to such a degree that the constitutional rights of a party are compromised. These types of errors can be reviewed by a court of appeals even if the appellant did not object at trial.