Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Washington » Supreme Court of Washington » 1973 » 82 Wn.2d 882, THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. BRIAN JOSEPH REGAN, Appellant.
82 Wn.2d 882, THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. BRIAN JOSEPH REGAN, Appellant.
State: Washington
Court: Supreme Court
Docket No: 42718
Case Date: 10/11/1973

82 Wn.2d 882, THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. BRIAN JOSEPH REGAN, Appellant.

[No. 42718. En Banc.      Supreme Court      October 11, 1973.]

THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. BRIAN JOSEPH
                               REGAN, Appellant.

FINLEY, J., did not participate in the disposition of this case.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 755084, Edward E. Henry, J., entered August 22, 1972. Affirmed.

Prosecution under the habitual traffic offender act. The defendant appeals from a conviction and revocation of driving privileges.

Carroll, Rindal, Caplinger & Kennedy, by Robert S. Schuck, for appellant.

Christopher T. Bayley, Prosecuting Attorney, and John E. Nelson, Deputy, for respondent.

HUNTER, J. -

The defendant (appellant), Brian Joseph Regan, appeals from an order entered by the King County Superior Court declaring him to be an habitual traffic offender as defined in RCW 46.65.020(2). The defendant had accumulated 20 or more moving traffic violations within the previous 5 years. RCW 46.65 requires, under these circumstances, that the defendant's license be revoked for 5 years subject to the right to petition for the return of the license after 2 years.

The defendant challenges the constitutionality of RCW 46.65, the Washington Habitual Traffic Offenders Act (effective August 9, 1971). The issues raised and arguments in support of the defendant's contentions were all, in effect considered in State v. Scheffel, 82 Wn.2d 872, 514 P.2d 1052 (1973), which we deem controlling and dispositive of the issues in the instant case. In that case we held that the act as challenged is constitutionally valid.

The order entered by the trial court is therefore affirmed.

HALE, C.J., ROSELLINI, HAMILTON, STAFFORD, WRIGHT, UTTER, and BRACHTENBACH, JJ., concur.

Washington Law

Washington State Laws
Washington Court
    > Washington State Courts
Washington Labor Laws
    > Washington State Jobs
Washington State
    > Washington County Jail
Washington Tax
Washington Agencies
    > Washington DMV

Comments

Tips