IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

No. 81279-9 (consolidated)

CITY OF SEATTLE v. QUEZADA,

Filed October 29, 2009
______________________________
CHAMBERS, J. — In separate prosecutions, petitioners Scott Winebrenner and Jesus Quezada were each found guilty of driving under the influence (DUI) after their deferred prosecutions were revoked by the trial court. In both cases, the court declined to consider offenses committed after the current offense in determining the mandatory minimum sentence under RCW 46.61.5055(1). At issue is the meaning of “prior offenses” under thestatute and whether a “prior offense” is one that occurs before the arrest for the current offense or before sentencing. Concluding that the statute is ambiguous and subject to two reasonable interpretations, we apply the rule of lenity and construe it in favor of the petitioners. We reverse the Court of Appeals.

For more information and the full opinion read ”Go figure…a “Prior DUI” actually means an offense committed before the current DUI.“

Related posts:

1. STATE V. GARVIN, 166 Wn.2d 242 (2009)
2. State v. Nguyen, 165 Wn.2d 428 (2008)
3. Washington Driver’s Right’s Card
4. Odor of Marijuana – State v. Grande, 164 Wn.2d 135 (2008)
5. STATE V. TONELLI-PRADO, 145 Wn. App. 646 (Div. I, 2008)