RULES OF COURT
STATE SUPREME COURT
[January 5, 2023]
IN THE MATTER OF THE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO CrRLJ 7.4—ARREST OF JUDGMENT
Judge Steele, having recommended the suggested amendments to CrRLJ 7.4—Arrest of Judgment, and the Court having approved the suggested amendments for publication;
Now, therefore, it is hereby
(a) That pursuant to the provisions of GR 9(g), the suggested amendments as shown below are to be published for comment in the Washington Reports, Washington Register, Washington State Bar Association and Administrative Office of the Court's websites in January 2023.
(b) The purpose statement as required by GR 9(e), is published solely for the information of the Bench, Bar and other interested parties.
(c) Comments are to be submitted to the Clerk of the Supreme Court by either U.S. Mail or Internet E-Mail by no later than April 30, 2023. Comments may be sent to the following addresses: P.O. Box 40929, Olympia, Washington 98504-0929, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Comments submitted by e-mail message must be limited to 1500 words.
dated at Olympia, Washington this 5th day of January, 2023.
For the Court
GENERAL RULE 9
RULE AMENDMENT COVER SHEET
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CrRLJ 7.4 and CrRLJ 7.5
1. Mason County District Court
2. George A. Steele (360) 427-9670 Ex. 339 GSteele@masoncountywa.gov
3. To give Courts of Limited Jurisdiction have the same flexibility as Superior Courts, when motions under CrRLJ 7.4 and CrRLJ 7.5 are brought.
4. The Superior Court has the ability to waive the deadlines to file motions under CrR 7.4 and CrR 7.5; Courts of Limited Jurisdiction do not. This can be unfair to defendants who might have meritorious motions for the relief sought under CrRLJ 7.4 and CrRLJ 7.5. I view this suggested rule as a fairly minor adjustment to the current rules. The time frames have also been extended from five days to ten days to match the superior court rule and create a more realistic time period.
5. Is Expedited Consideration Requested? No.
6. Is a Public Hearing Recommended? Probably.
ARREST OF JUDGMENT
(a) Arrest of Judgment. Judgment may be arrested on the motion of the defendant for the following causes: (1) lack of jurisdiction of the person or offense; (2) the complaint or citation and notice does not charge a crime; or (3) insufficiency of the proof of a material element of the crime.
(b) Time for Motion; Contents of Motion. A motion for arrest of judgment must be served and filed within 510 days after the verdict or decision. The court on application of the defendant or on its own motion may in its discretion extend the time until such time as judgment is entered. The motion for arrest of judgment shall identify the specific reasons in fact and law for each ground on which the motion is based.
(c) New Charges After Arrest of Judgment. When judgment is arrested and there is reasonable ground to believe that the defendant can be convicted of an offense properly charged, the court may order the defendant to be recommitted or released to answer a new complaint or citation and notice. If judgment was arrested because there was no proof of a material element of the crime the defendant shall be discharged.
(d) Rulings on Alternative Motions in Arrest of Judgment or for a New Trial. Whenever a motion in arrest of a judgment and, in the alternative, for a new trial is filed and submitted in any criminal cause tried before a jury, and the court enters an order granting the motion in arrest of judgment, the court shall, at the same time, in the alternative, pass upon and decide in the same order the motion for a new trial. The ruling upon the motion for a new trial shall not become effective unless and until the order granting the motion in arrest of judgment is reversed, vacated, or set aside in the manner provided by law.
[Adopted effective September 1, 1987; Amended effective September 1, 1991.]
Reviser's note: The typographical error in the above material occurred in the copy filed by the
state supreme court and appears in the Register pursuant to the requirements of RCW 34.08.040.