Download in Word Perfect format

In reading State v. Bash, consider the following questions:

1. What were the defendants charged with in this case?

2. What are the key facts?

3. Was there a trial in this case?  If not, why not?  How did the case get to the Washington Supreme Court?

4. What is the voluntary act in this case?

5. What is the key issue addressed by the parties and the court in this case?

6. What state of mind is required for conviction of the offense charged?  What state of mind is stated in the statute?

7. What was the prosecutor’s position with regard to the required state of mind?  What was the defense position?  Which did the trial court accept?

8. What methodology does Judge Madsen’s (the lead) opinion use to reach its conclusions? What sources of law does this opinion look to? (These are important questions!)

9. What factors does the court (lead opinion) use to determine whether the statute is strict liability or has a required state of mind?

10. What does the court mean by "malum in se"? "mala prohibita"?  Why does it matter?

11. What does the court mean by "strict liability"?

12. Explain in your own words the ambiguity regarding the phrase "whether the dog has previously been declared potentially dangerous or dangerous." How does the court resolve this ambiguity? Why does it matter?

13. What conclusion does the court reach with regard to whether/what state of mind is required?

14. What do you think ultimately persuaded the court to reach this result?

15. Write a jury instruction for 16.08.100(3) in light of Bash.

16. Why does Chief Justice Durham concur?

17. Why does Judge Dolliver dissent?

18. Which view do you like better and why?

19. State at least five rules derived from this case regarding the interpretation of criminal statutes with regard to mens rea requirements.

20. Note at least two additional things from the case that you believe are important or that are confusing to you. Why do they matter?