Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 893900.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/893900.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,766 chars

PETER RICHARD BARTON,
Filed July 31, 2014
Petitioner.

STEPHENS, J.-This case centers on article I, section 20 of the Washington

State Constitution and its mandate that criminal defendants "shall be bailable by

sufficient sureties." Peter Barton's bail was set at $500,000; invoking Criminal Rule

(CrR) 3.2(b)(4), the trial court ordered that Barton post 10 percent of that amount

with the registry of the court in cash or other security. Barton claims this order

violates his guaranty to bail by sufficient sureties.

We hold that article I, section 20 means a defendant must be allowed the

option to secure bail via a surety, as distinct from cash or other security. To the

extent the trial court's order disallowed this possibility, we vacate the order and

remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
 Statev. Barton
 (Peter
   
Richard), 89390-0     

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

At his arraignment on August 13 20 12, Barton pleaded not guilty to a charge

of rape of a child in the first degree. The court set bail at $250,000. The prosecutor

asked for a condition requiring 10 percent of the amount to be deposited in cash with

the registry of the court. Barton objected to the cash-only bail, and the trial court

delayed consideration of the request.

At a hearing the next day, the State asked the court to increase Barton's bail

to $1,000,000 and direct that if Barton "should post bond that 10 percent of that be

in cash." Verbatim Report of Proceedings (VRP) (Aug. 14, 2012) at 3. The judge

entered an order setting bail at $500,000 and stating that Barton was required to

execute a "bond with [sic] depositing 10% cash in the registry of the court." Clerk's