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

1,255 chars

location of the ammunition was not readily accessible by members of the BCSO, and

Sheriff Hatcher made no effort to notify anyone of the location of the ammunition,

even when he could no longer legally possess firearms.

10
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

Multiple officers indicate in their declarations that the amount of ammunition

greatly exceeded what an officer would use for practice, and there is no reason for an

officer to have ammunition for a caliber of weapon not assigned by the BCSO.

In his declaration, former BCSO Commander Tom Croskrey stated that he was

“shocked” by the volume of ammunition, that the .308 caliber ammunition is not

“practice” ammunition (as it is intended for the SWAT team, and they do not use

“practice” ammunition), and that having cases (instead of boxes) of ammunition was

“troubling.” Id. at 92.

In his declaration, Commander Jon Law states that the amount of ammunition

that Sheriff Hatcher had at his home was “astronomical” and “would never be

distributed in this amount to anyone unless there was a specific reason stated in

advance.” Id. at 68. Further, he states,