Kelly v. Moesslang

In re the Matter of: BETTE LYN KELLY, Appellant,
v.
PETER MOESSLANG, Respondent.

No. 29210-0-III

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISIION THREE

Dated: September 18, 2012

 

(Cons. w/ No. 29746-2-III)
PUBLISHED OPINION

State of Washington v. Israel

54 P.3d 1218
113 Wash.App. 243

STATE of Washington, Respondent,
v.
David R. ISRAEL, Defendant, and
Willie James King, and each of them, Appellant.
State of Washington, Appellant/Cross Respondent,
v.
David R. Israel, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, and
Willie James King, and each of them, Defendant.

Nos. 44731-9-I, 45051-4-I, 45956-2-I.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

September 9, 2002.

Le Associates v. Diaz-Luong

LE & ASSOCIATES, PS, a professional service corporation, Respondent,
v.
ROBERTO DIAZ-LUONG, and LAN THI NGUYEN, husband
and wife and the marital community comprised thereof, Appellants.

No. 66695-9-I

COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DIVISION ONE

FILED: July 9, 2012

 

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

State of Washington v. Dingman

202 P.3d 388

149 Wn. App. 648

STATE of Washington, Respondent and Cross Appellant,
v.
Robert Corcoran DINGMAN, Appellant and Cross Respondent.

No. 34719-9-II.

No. 35949-9-II.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2.

March 10, 2009.

 

        ¶ 1 Robert Dingman appeals his conviction of 16 counts of first degree theft and 11

[202 P.3d 389]

State of Washington v. Olson

47 Wn.App. 514
735 P.2d 1362
STATE of Washington, Respondent,
v.
Laurence M. OLSON, Appellant.
No. 16724-3-I.
Court of Appeals of Washington,
Division 1.
April 29, 1987.

        Laurence M. Olson appeals from a judgment and sentence for the crime of computer trespass. He contends that this conduct did not come within the prohibition of the statute.

        RCW 9A.52.110 reads as follows:

Page 515

Harris v. Charles

Joshua HARRIS, Petitioner,
v.
Honorable Edsonya CHARLES, Director of King County Adult Detention and City of Seattle, Respondents.
No. 61629-3-I.
Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.
August 31, 2009.
 

        ¶ 1 A statute entitles felons detained before trial on electronic home monitoring to be credited for the time served. No statute entitles misdemeanants to the same credit. In view of the differences between felony and misdemeanor sentencing, we hold this distinction is rational and does not violate the Equal Protection Clause.

T–Mobile USA, Inc. v. Terry

T–MOBILE USA, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff,
v.
Sherman TERRY, et al., Defendants.
No. 3:11–cv–5655–RBL.
United States District Court,
W.D. Washington,
at Tacoma.
April 23, 2012.

ORDER GRANTING PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND ENTERING PERMANENT INJUNCTION AGAINST DEFENDANT GEORGE COLLETT