Court Opinion

ID: 9546513
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 17:30:57.472962+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:16:32.589910
License: Public Domain

Green, J.
(concurring) — I concur because the mandatory requirements of CrR 3.3 as strictly interpreted in State v. Williams, 85 Wn.2d 29, 32, 530 P.2d 225 (1975), seem to require this result. However, I have difficulty reconciling the strict application of the mandatory language of this rule in an area where a constitutional right to speedy trial has not been shown to be impaired with the apparent leniency in the application of what appears to be mandatory language in the civil rules. See Moore v. Burdman, 84 Wn.2d 408, 526 *855P.2d 893 (1974); Malott v. Randall, 83 Wh.2d 259, 517 P.2d 605 (1974); Myers v. Harris, 82 Wn.2d 152, 509 P.2d 656 (1973); O’Connor v. Matzdorff, 76 Wn.2d 589, 458 P.2d 154 (1969).