Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/9666771/Hanson-v-City-of-Snohomish-Supreme-Court-decision
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 21:13:28+00:00

Document:
obtained by fraud, perjury or other corrupt means.
defamation. The Superior Court, Snohomish County, appeal, rule is not inexorable and has limitations.
Joseph A. Thibodeau, J., dismissed all but defamation RAP 12.1(b).
of identification procedures used by police in 249k55 k. Issues, Proof, and Variance.
Cases action for malicious prosecution.
determining whether malicious prosecution occurred. during trial but were not suppressed.
of probable cause for purposes of malicious opportunity to present its case.
prosecution claim unless conviction was obtained by same as those determined in criminal case.
grounds for reversal was absence of probable cause.
Proceedings. Most Cited Cases assault.
party to prior adjudication, and application of criminal trial. A jury found him guilty as charged.
doctrine must not work injustice.
arrest and imprisonment. new trial, Hanson was acquitted.
Allen & Hansen, P.S., David Allen, Richard Hansen, Wash.2d 1003 (1987).
This action for malicious prosecution, false arrest and had spent approximately 18 months in jail.
identified Hanson as her assailant. Three procedures were improperly suggestive.
malicious prosecution, false arrest and imprisonment, fraud, perjury or other corrupt means.
FN3. The trial court denied the City's 437, 656 P.2d 1030 (1982).
affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Hanson Wash.2d 484, 487, 834 P.2d 6 (1992).
asked the parties for additional briefing on the issue probable cause as a matter of law.
inexorable and has its limitations”. Maynard Inv. Co.
subsequently reversed conclusively establish the (1990); Crawford v. Wojnas, 51 Wash.App.
the conviction was obtained by fraud, perjury or other Wash.2d 1027 (1988).
criminal action against Gerald Hanson? written argument on the issue raised by the court.
 CONCLUSION. The conviction of an accused P.2d 340 (1989).
imprisonment, and civil rights claims. We affirm, 119, at 876.
Peasley v. Puget Sound Tug & Barge Co., 681.
13 Wash.2d 485, 496, 125 P.2d 681 (1942).
The reasons assigned for this attitude on the part of 681.
to damages merely because the accused is not Wash.2d 654, 656, 374 P.2d 1000 (1962).
those surrounding actions based on almost any other (1970).
perjury or other corrupt means.
probable cause. Dissenting opinion, at 21.
the rule applies legally unsupportable. See, e.g., State v.
and when after a conviction has been set aside, the Seizure § 3.4(c) (2d ed. 1987).
that the person who initiated the proceedings had probable cause.
reasonable grounds for so doing.
266 P. 162 (1928). In Hall, the sole issue was present case and we do not reach that issue.
void or to be the result of perjury. This court did not 681.
266 P. 162 (1928). by fraud, perjury or other corrupt practices.
 There is a distinction between a finding of ISSUE TWO.
established the existence of probable cause. Gerald Hanson.
rule that a conviction establishes probable cause.
Whether those procedures were proper was decided 746 P.2d 1228 (1987).
in the City's favor in the criminal action.
Hanson alleges here, as he did in the criminal S.Ct. 411, 66 L.Ed.2d 308 (1980).
alleges the police manipulated the composite 665, 674 P.2d 165 (1983).
was unsuccessful. He may not now relitigate this merits.
issue in this related civil case.
economy and to prevent harassment of and in his civil action.
criminal case,FN25 as well as in a civil rights action in admissible. On appeal, the Court of Appeals agreed.
P.2d 16. (1977)), review denied,108 Wash.2d 1003 (1987).
challenge to the photographic montage, determining 592, 664 P.2d 492 (1983).
Wash.App. 1, 13, 781 P.2d 1329 (1989).
Wash.2d 1003 (1987). those relating to the identification procedures.
not request review of the court's decision. The this case.
presented to the trial court at the suppression hearing summary judgment of dismissal is reinstated.
police impermissibly manipulated identification SMITH and GUY, JJ., concur.
issues is met for purposes of collateral estoppel. opinion.
MADSEN, J., did not participate.
Furthermore, application of the doctrine of collateral UTTER, Justice (dissenting).
Court of Appeals. been injured by unlawful law enforcement action.
false arrest and imprisonment.FN29 Since probable respectfully dissent.
369 (1975); Vincioni v. Phelps Dodge Corp., 35 N.M.
FN1. More complete statements of the facts 81, 290 P. 319 (1930); Miera v. Waltemeyer, 97 N.M.
in this case may be found in the decision of 588, 642 P.2d 191, 194-195 (N.M.App.1982), cert.
the Court of Appeals in Hanson's criminal quashed,98 N.M. 51, 644 P.2d 1040 (1982); Cap v.
reversed conviction because it was not raised by any legal issues in this case.
as the “prima facie” rule. follow.
jurisdictions, is analytically unsound, and has the e.g., Thompson v. Louisville, 362 U.S. 199, 80 S.Ct.
(Iowa 1977); Jones v. Soileau, 448 So.2d 1268, 1271- *567Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S.Ct.
was a total lack of evidence to support it, is not to be prosecution actions.
of New Jersey aptly observed: probable cause.
plaintiff be deprived of his cause of action? If that The majority cites this court's decision in Hall v.
(1975). This logic is particularly relevant to this case. adopt the conclusiveness rule.
permitting the introduction of irrelevant and actions are not favored in the law. See *569Peasley v.
by a trial judge. (1986).
prosecution is “ ‘protecting the individual from the court may do so.
even when that conviction is itself infirm. This is not most such issues will affect the outcome of a case.
II none of which apply here.
conclusiveness rule was not raised by the City of of manifest error affecting a constitutional right.
this court has the inherent authority to consider such 643 P.2d 882 (1982) (same).
issues if necessary to decide a case, Harris v.
suggestive of the rule at hand, it does not explicitly discussion of the wisdom of the conclusiveness rule.
sua sponte do not exist in this case. Furthermore, an positions, the law would be much better served.
authorities. The persons Hanson accuses, the City of and a compendium.
around the application of collateral estoppel. The of the conclusiveness rule in this case.
between the parties in the role of an impartial on which it reached this court.
manner in which to describe the court's role in this court on appeal, I would affirm the Court of Appeals.
precedent. It is the obligation of this court to arrest or prosecute is made).
Washington, 60 Wash.L.Rev. 805, 841 (1984-85); Wash.2d 604, 608, 682 P.2d 878 (1984); State v.
481 n. 22, 102 S.Ct. 1883, 1897 n. 22, 72 L.Ed.2d (1988), review denied,110 Wash.2d 1029 (1988).
the elements of collateral estoppel must be met, if the as to taint the resulting identification. See Manson v.
identical to those relevant to Hanson's claims for whether the police conduct was “proper”.
the existence of probable cause, there is an important ‘properly’.
determined by an objective evaluation of what the Appeals was correct to deny collateral estoppel.
arrest or prosecution. JOHNSON, J., concurs.
Probable cause exists where the facts and Wash.,1993.
an offense has been or is being committed.
Co., 13 Wash.2d 485, 509, 125 P.2d 681 (1942).
100 N.C.App. 518, 521, 397 S.E.2d 347, 349 (1990).
correctly denied the application of collateral estoppel.
the effect on the identifier is not overly suggestive.
had probable cause to arrest and prosecute.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v.

 § 3
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

 v.

 v.

 v.