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

1,770 chars

intention to track the language of CrR 3 .2(b)(4) and require Barton to post 10 percent

of the bond with the court "in cash or other security." !d. at 27. The court modified

its August 15, 2012 order to read, "Defendant shall execute a bond in the amount of

$500,000 and deposit in the registry of the court in [sic] $50,000 cash or other

security.... " CP at 13 (Order (Oct. 18, 2012)).

Barton appealed the bail order, and the parties stipulated that the order was

reviewable under Rule of Appellate Procedure (RAP) 2.3(b)(4). The commissioner

of the Court of Appeals accepted the stipulation and granted review, explaining that

even if the case became moot the court would still review the question. Barton

moved to transfer the case to this court, which the acting commissioner granted. In

doing so, our acting commissioner noted that "the proper form of bail is a matter of

continuing and substantial public interest," overcoming any claim of mootness.

Ruling Granting Mot. To Transfer (Nov. 21, 2013) at 3.

returned upon the performance of the conditions of release or forfeited for
violation of any condition of release.
CrR 3.2.

-3-
 Statev. Barton
 (Peter
   
Richard), 89390-0     

ANALYSIS

Article I, section 20 reads:

All persons charged with crime shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, except
for capital offenses when the proof is evident, or the presumption great. Bail
may be denied for offenses punishable by the possibility of life in prison upon
a showing by clear and convincing evidence of a propensity for violence that
creates a substantial likelihood of danger to the community or any persons,
subject to such limitations as shall be determined by the legislature.