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

1,741 chars

-6-
 Statev. Barton
 (Peter
   
Richard), 89390-0     

interpretation." Wash. Water Jet Workers Ass 'n v. Yarbrough, 151 Wn.2d 470,477,

90 P.3d 42 (2004) (Water Jet). "The words of the text will be given their common
and ordinary meaning, as determined at the time they were drafted." Id. We should

look to the historical context of the provision for guidance. Id.
The parties seem to agree that the constitutional framers had in mind more

than one purpose in adopting article I, section 20. They disagree on which purpose

should take prominence. Barton argues that, more than ensuring a defendant's

appearance, the provision is intended to protect the accused's presumption of

innocence. Pet'r's Opening Br. at 16. In contrast, the State emphasizes the court's

interest over the defendant's. See, e.g., Br. ofResp't at 6-7 (explaining its view that

"Washington courts have recognized that the court's interest is the main reason for

bail in modem times" (citing State v. Paul, 95 Wn. App. 775, 778, 976 P.2d 1272

(1999); State v. Banuelos, 91 Wn. App. 860, 863, 960 P.2d 952 (1998); State v.

Kramer, 167 Wn.2d 548,561,219 P.3d 700 (2009))). "Of course, there can be more

than one purpose motivating a provision of the state constitution." Water Jet, 151

Wn.2d at 484. Thus, we must examine article I, section 20 with both of these

purposes in mind.

The key word at issue in article I, section 20 is "sureties." Black's Law
Dictionary defines "surety" as "[a] person who is primarily liable for the payment

of another's debt or the performance of another's obligation." BLACK'S LAW

DICTIONARY 1579 (9th ed. 2009). This modem definition is not markedly different