Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 989681.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 989681.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source: Official source
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/989681.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,798 chars

“Factually sufficient means the petitioner has alleged facts that establish a

prima facie case of misfeasance, malfeasance, or violation of the oath of office.” In re

Recall of Ackerson, 143 Wn.2d 366, 371, 20 P.3d 930 (2001). “The charges as a

whole must identify to the electors and to the official being recalled acts or omissions

that without justification support recall.” Id. The facts alleged must be concise but

detailed and must include specific information regarding the date, location, and

nature of the allegation. Wasson, 149 Wn.2d at 791; RCW 29A.56.110. Although the

recall petitioner need not have firsthand knowledge of an allegation, the recall

petitioner must have some knowledge of the allegations that is more than a belief the

charges are true. Ackerson, 143 Wn.2d at 372. “[W]e may consider supporting

7
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
In re Recall Charges Against Benton County Sheriff Gerald D. Hatcher,
No. 98968-1

documentation to determine whether the charges are factually sufficient.” West, 155

Wn.2d at 663.

“When an official is accused of a crime, the recall petitioner must have

knowledge of facts indicating intent to violate the law.” Ackerson, 143 Wn.2d at 373.

Intent to violate a law may be inferred from the circumstances, but may not be “‘too

conjectural.’” In re Recall of Heiberg, 171 Wn.2d 771, 778, 257 P.3d 565 (2011)

(quoting Ackerson, 143 Wn.2d at 373).

In addition to factual sufficiency, the petitioner must show legal sufficiency.

“Legal sufficiency means the charge must define substantial conduct clearly

amounting to misfeasance, malfeasance or a violation of the oath of office.” Wasson,

149 Wn.2d at 791. If an official has a legally cognizable justification for the conduct,