Washington State Supreme Court

From Judgepedia

The Washington State Supreme Court is the court of last resort in Washington. It is based in Olympia in the Temple of Justice on the state capitol grounds. Nine justices serve on the court; they are elected in non-partisan elections to serve six-year terms.

The court's duties and responsibilities are defined in Article IV of the Washington State Constitution of 1889. That constitution originally set the number of judges on the court at five, giving the Washington state legislature the right to change the number of judges from time to time as it deemed advisable.

Jurisdiction

The jurisdiction of the Washington State Supreme Court is defined in Section 4 of Article IV of the Washington State Constitution.

Case load

Some 8,500 cases are tried each year before the 143 judges of the Superior Courts of Washington State, the trial court of general jurisdiction. About 3,500 appeals are filed by losing parties claiming that the outcome was the result of error, either of fact or law, sometimes both. In 2007, the Washington Supreme Court had a total of 1,463 filings. Ninety-eight of these were from trial courts, 1,120 were from the Court of Appeals, 134 were original actions, WSBA4/CJC contributed 109 cases, and two were certified issues.^[1]

The court's justices

Selection of justices

The rules for electing justices to the court are set out in Article IV of the Washington Constitution and in Chapter 2.06 of the Revised Code of Washington. The Article calls for nine justices to be elected to six-year terms in non-partisan elections. In the case of a vacancy, the replacement justice is appointed by the governor.

Qualifications

To be considered a qualified candidate to serve on the Washington Supreme Court, a person must be licensed to practice law in Washington, as laid out in Section 17 of Article IV.

Justices must also retire from service at the end of the calendar year that he or she turns 75, according to Section 3(a) of Article IV of the state constitution. The state legislature is given the leeway under the constitution to reduce the retirement age to 70 should they see fit to do so.

Additionally, according to Section 15 of Article IV, justices of the court are ineligible to serve in any other form of public employment during their term on the court, nor, according to Section 19, are they allowed to practice law in any Washington state court during their tenure on the court.

Current justices

Chief justice

The Chief Justice serves as the court's chief spokesperson, presiding over the court’s public hearings and serving as the administrative head of the state’s trial and appellate court system. The Chief Justice also chairs the Board for Judicial Administration (BJA), which is the the policy-setting group of the state judiciary.^[2] Up until 1995, the chief justice was determined through a rotation system. In 1995, the voters of the state passed a constitutional amendment changing this system to one where the Chief Justice is elected by the other justices. That same amendment changed the term of the Chief Justice from two to four years.

Barbara Madsen is the current Chief Justice of the court. She was sworn in on January 11, 2010 to fill the remainder of Gerry Alexander's term. Madsen is only the second woman to fill the role of Chief Justice on the Washington Supreme Court.

Gerry Alexander was the court's 52nd Chief Justice. He succeeded retiring chief justice Richard Guy in 2000. In November 2008 he was elected by the other justices of the court to a third term as the state's top judge. Alexander was the longest-serving Chief Justice in the state's history. He reaches mandatory retirement age in 2011 and therefore will only serve three of the four years of the term to which he was elected in 2008.

Salaries

Although in some state courts the chief justice earns more than a court's associate justices, each of the nine justices on the Washington State Supreme court is paid the same: $164,221.^[3]

Notable rulings

No-contact order

In State v. Warren, a 2008 decision, the court upheld a lower court sentence that permanently banned a convicted child molester from contacting his wife, who was not a direct victim of his crimes. The decision was 8-1, with Richard Sanders the only dissent.

Richard H. Warren, who was convicted of child molestation and child rape against two stepdaughters, in two separate King County Superior Court trials in 2003, had argued that the no-contact order imposed as a sentence after those trials was not "reasonably related" to his crime, and was an unconstitutional violation of his marriage rights.

The court disagreed, saying that based on the evidence, limiting Warren's marriage rights was reasonably necessary to achieve the compelling state interest of protecting the girls and their mother.^[4]

Same-sex marriage

In a July 2006 decision that split 5-4, the justices issued six opinions in the case, with some in the majority saying that the state legislature remained free to extend the right to marry to gay and lesbian couples. The four dissenting justices said the majority relied on speculation and circular reasoning to endorse discrimination against gay men and lesbians. The decision consolidated two cases in which state trial courts had struck down a 1998 state law prohibiting same-sex marriages. The cases were brought by 19 gay and lesbian couples seeking the right to marry or to have their marriages from other jurisdictions recognized in Washington.^[5]

Prisoners and public records

The Court issued a 5-4 ruling in July 2008 saying that while prisoners may make open records requests, and that the state must fulfill them, the correctional facility is under no obligation to actually deliver the document to the felon.

"The Public Records Act does not limit the department's discretion in prohibiting entry of public records that it reasonably deems inappropriate in a prison setting," Justice Madsen wrote for the majority. Joining her were Chief Justice Gerry Alexander and Justices Bobbe Bridge, Mary Fairhurst and Charles Johnson.^[6]

Dissenters were led by James Johnson.

Public disclosure

• May 2004. Communications between government agencies and their lawyers are exempt from the state public-disclosure law, the Washington Supreme Court ruled May 13, 2004. In a 5-4 opinion, the court concluded that attorney-client privilege supersedes the requirements of the landmark state Public Disclosure Act, approved by voters as an initiative in 1972. Justice Gerry Alexander, writing for the majority, said it's clear the Legislature created the exemption when it amended the disclosure law, which makes most government documents available to the public, in 1987. Justice Charles Johnson wrote a strongly-worded dissent, labeling the majority's opinion as "absurd," arguing it "renders ineffectual the (law's) strong mandate to agencies that they must disclose public information." News and open-government organizations reacted angrily to the ruling.^[7]

• January 2009. In Rental Housing Association of Puget Sound v. City of Des Moines, justice Debra Stephens wrote the 8-1 majority opinion. Public information advocates hailed the decision.

• October 2009. In City of Federal Way v. Koenig, written by Susan Owens, the court said that Washington's Public Disclosure Act does not apply to state judicial records. Owens was joined in her opinion by Charles Johnson, Mary Fairhurst, James Johnson, Tom Chambers and Justice Pro Tem Joel M. Penoyar.^[8]

History of the court

Washington has had three distinct Supreme Courts in its relatively short history. While part of the Oregon Territory (1848-1853) three justices, appointed by the President of the United States, served on the territorial Supreme Court. When not hearing appeals the three jurists rode circuit, presiding over important trials in three separate and widespread judicial districts which encompassed much of the present-day Oregon, Washington and Idaho. In 1853 the area north of the Columbia River and east to the Continental Divide was separated from Oregon and became the Washington Territory with its own Supreme Court composed of three (and later four) justices.^[9]

Constitution of 1889

On October 1, 1889, the people of the Washington "Territory" west of the present Idaho line approved a state constitution, elected public officials and by means of an Act of Congress became a full-fledged member of the Union. The Supreme Court was composed of five justices elected by the voters of the state. John P. Hoyt, Thomas J. Anders, T. L. Stiles, Ralph 0. Dunbar and Elmon Scott were the original members of the court. Hoyt had served on the territorial Supreme Court and was presiding officer at the convention that wrote the new state constitution. Stiles and Dunbar also were delegates to that convention.

The number of justices serving on the Supreme Court has varied from the original five to the present nine. Although justices were no longer responsible for riding the trial court circuit as in territorial days, they continued to experience crowded dockets, necessitating an increase in membership. In 1905 the court was permanently expanded to seven justices and in 1909 the number was increased to the present nine. Between 1889 and 1909 all cases were heard en banc, with all justices participating. Between 1909 and 1969 most cases were heard by a department of the court, each composed of the Chief Justice and four associate Justices. Since establishment of the Court of Appeals in 1969 all cases are heard en banc.

Each justice serves a six-year term, with three submitting themselves to the electorate every two years. Vacancies that occur through resignation or death are filled by the Governor, but these appointees must gain approval of the voters at the next general election. Nearly two-thirds of all justices of the Supreme Court have been initially appointed to fill a vacancy, but with rare exception all appointees have been confirmed by the voters.

Early 20th Century

In 1907 the legislature established a direct nonpartisan election system for nominating judges, replacing political party conventions. Separate nonpartisan ballots were also authorized for the November general elections, removing judges from the political party lists. Except for a brief return to partisanship in 1912, the names of candidates for the Supreme Court have subsequently appeared on nonpartisan ballots.

Chosen by the other justices of the court for a two-year term, the Chief Justice must be one of those next up for election, and usually is the senior of the three. The Chief Justice presides at all court sessions, handles administrative responsibilities, chairs the state judicial conference and represents the court and judicial system in many public appearances.

Overview of the court

There are four levels of courts in Washington: (1) the Supreme Court; (2) the Washington Court of Appeals; (3) the superior courts, and (4) the courts of limited jurisdiction (district and municipal courts).

The three divisions of the Court of Appeals are located in Seattle (Division One), Tacoma (Division Two), and Spokane (Division Three). Each of the state’s 39 counties has a superior court (though in some cases, multiple small counties comprise one superior court district, such as the Benton-Franklin County Superior Court). Each county has a district court with at least one district court facility (larger counties may have multiple district court locations) and many of the state’s cities and towns have municipal courts.^[10]

See also

• Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority v. Miller (2006)
• HTK Management, L.L.C. v. Seattle Popular Monorail Authority (2005)
• Hangartner v. City of Seattle (2004)
• In re Election Contest Filed by Coday (2006)
• Yousoufian v. Office of the King County Executive (2004)

External links

• Washington Appellate and Trial Courts Official Site
• Fact sheet on judicial campaigns in Washington
• Media Guide to the Court
• The State of the Washington Supreme Court: A 2008 Update
• The Washington Supreme Court: A Special Issue Report
• State of Washington Constitution
• Report of the Courts of Washington
• The Washington Supreme Court blog, an unofficial blog that covers the court

References