Skip to content

Free Consultation

The sooner you talk to someone about your case, the better you will feel. We want to hear from you, 24/7.

Your Name (required)

Your Email Address (required)

Subject

Your Message

Enter this text below: captcha

Call: (206) 382-9200 or email: kevin@tromboldlaw.com

(Close)

Washington DUI Caselaw Summary – Harris v. Charles (May 2011)

The Supreme Court of Washington decided that mandating credit for time served on pretrial home detention was not required in misdemeanor courts as it is in felony courts. Such different treatment of misdemeanants than felons was not an equal protection violation.

Interestingly, the Supremes reason that mandating the credit in the lower courts would significantly affect the courts discretion.  Felons might still serve long sentences after significant pretrial or presentence EHD maintaining those courts discretion.  But the lower courts might not have any jail left to impose.

The goal of nonfelony sentencing is to promote rehabilitation, the Supreme Court reasons.  In contrast, the Sentencing Reform Act intends to limit felony sentencing courts discretion – rehabilitation is not a justification for sentences.

The  that the misdemeanor courts do have discretion to give credit but are not mandated to give it.

Rule of Harris v. Charles – No automatic right to credit for time served on EHD exists for misdemeanants as it does for felons under the SRA.  But court has discretion.

Joshua Harris v. The Honorable Edsonya Charles, Director of King County Adult Detention, and The City of Seattle, Supreme Court of Washington, No. 83867-4, May 12, 2011.

Categories: 2011 Washington DUI Caselaw Update, DUI Sentencing, Washington Supreme Court.

Switch to our mobile site