Gunwall factors
WebMar 7, 2000 · The fifth Gunwall factor, structural differences between the federal and state constitutions, also favors enhanced protections to Washington citizens by maintaining a literal interpretation of "private use." As previously noted, there are marked differences between the two relevant provisions. But, because the United States Constitution is a ... Webthis respect, Gunwall's case-by-case approach may plausibly give Washington State citizens protections that have been unanticipated or overlooked by the United States …
Gunwall factors
Did you know?
WebThe fourth GUNWALL factor directs the court to examine preexisting state law which can "help to define the scope of a constitutional right later established." 106 Wn.2d at 62. In … WebIn the midst of the global COVID-19 pandemic, petitioner Robert Williams filed a personal restraint petition (PRP) arguing that the conditions of his confinement constituted cruel punishment in violation of the state and federal constitutions. While confined in Department of Corrections (DOC) facilities, Williams asked the Washington Supreme Court to order …
Webthe context of felon voting. As previously mentioned, the Gunwall factors parallel inquiries made [*96] when interpreting a state constitutional provision to determine the extent of the protection it provides in a particular context. Boland, 115 Wn.2d at 575. Here an analysis of preexisting state law (Gunwall factor four) is especially useful. http://courts.mrsc.org/supreme/124wn2d/124wn2d0183.htm
WebDownload scientific diagram Percentage of total factors, pre- and post- Gunwall ð n 5 131 Þ from publication: Arguing GunwallThe Effect of the Criteria Test on Constitutional … WebWe, therefore, next look to the sixth Gunwall factor, which requires us to examine whether the privacy interest at issue is a matter of particular state or local concern. Gunwall, 106 Wash. 2d at 62, 720 P.2d 808. Because of some overlap, the discussion under the fourth factor also applies here. See Gunwall, 106 Wash. 2d at 67, 720 P.2d 808.
WebNov 25, 1991 · «7» See, for example, Rozner, 116 Wn.2d at 352, where our Supreme Court stated: "plaintiff fails to provide any specific discussion of the six Gunwall factors relied on by this court to determine whether the state constitution should be construed to grant broader rights than the federal constitution. In the past, the failure to present such a ...
WebJan 25, 2024 · 25 January 2024. 189 Wash.2d 858. 409 P.3d 160. Jonathan J. SPRAGUE, a married man, Petitioner, v. SPOKANE VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT, a fire district; Mike Thompson and Linda Thompson, husband and wife, and the marital community composed thereof, Respondents. No. 93800-8. Supreme Court of Washington. Filed January 25, 2024. chaussures aestheticWebSep 23, 1998 · An articulation of applicable Gunwall factors presented for the first time in a petition for review may be sufficient to permit the Supreme Court to consider the petitioner's claim that the state constitution provides greater protection than the federal constitution under the circumstances of the case. Jan. 1999 STATE v. MENDEZ 209 137 Wn.2d 208 chaussures adidas country og jhttp://guweb2.gonzaga.edu/~dewolf/pubs/46_GONZLR_1.pdf custom paper size not showing in printerWebunder a Gunwall analysis, the previous case will have already analyzed the first, second, third, and fifth Gunwall factors. Russell, 125 Wn.2d at 58. Thus, the court need only … chaussures adidas adizero fastcourt handballhttp://courts.mrsc.org/supreme/142wn2d/142wn2d0347.htm chaussures adidas handballWebJun 30, 1994 · Where the Gunwall factors are not adequately briefed by the parties, this court will not consider whether the state constitution provides greater protection than that provided by the federal constitution under the circumstances presented. Collier v. Tacoma, 121 Wn.2d 737, 763-66, 854 P.2d 1046 (1993) (Durham, J., concurring); State v. chaussure running pied plathttp://courts.mrsc.org/supreme/131wn2d/131wn2d0779.htm custom paper size windows 10