In re Personal Restraint of Bin-Bellah - Personal Restraint Petition
Summary
The Washington Supreme Court issued an opinion in In re Personal Restraint of Bin-Bellah, addressing a personal restraint petition filed by a criminal defendant seeking post-conviction relief. The court analyzed the applicable legal standards for granting personal restraint relief under Washington law. The decision establishes or clarifies procedural and substantive requirements for future personal restraint petitions in Washington courts.
What changed
The Washington Supreme Court issued its opinion in the Bin-Bellah personal restraint matter, addressing whether the petitioner met the legal threshold for post-conviction relief under Washington law. The court analyzed the procedural requirements and substantive standards applicable to personal restraint petitions, potentially clarifying or modifying existing precedent in this area.
For criminal defense attorneys and defendants seeking post-conviction relief in Washington, this opinion provides important guidance on petition requirements and the court's approach to evaluating personal restraint claims. Practitioners should carefully review the majority opinion and any concurring opinions to understand the full scope of the court's holding and its implications for future petitions.
What to do next
- Review Washington Supreme Court personal restraint petition standards
- Monitor for related Superior Court guidance on petition requirements
- Consult with legal counsel on application to pending cases
Archived snapshot
Apr 9, 2026GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.
View the Slip Opinion(s) Filed for this Case.
Tip: Opinions open faster in Edge, Chrome, and FireFox once the FireFox PDF reader has been disabled.
View a Printer Friendly Version of this Opinion Information Sheet.
Supreme Court of the State of Washington Opinion Information Sheet
| Docket Number: | 103,569-1 |
| Title of Case: | In re Pers. Restraint of Bin-Bellah |
| File Date: | 04/09/2026 |
| Oral Argument Date: | 09/16/2025 |
SOURCE OF APPEAL
| Appeal from King County Superior Court | |
| Docket No: | 18-1-02390-1 |
| Judgment or order under review | |
| Date filed: | 12/20/2019 |
| Judge signing: | Honorable Andrea A. Darvas |
JUSTICES
| Debra L. Stephens | Majority Author | |
| Charles W. Johnson | Signed Majority | |
| Steven C. González | Signed Majority | |
| Sheryl Gordon McCloud | Concurrence Author | |
| Raquel Montoya-Lewis | Signed Concurrence | |
| G. Helen Whitener | Signed Majority | |
| Salvador A. Mungia | Signed Majority | |
| Colleen M. Melody | Did Not Participate | |
| Theodore J. Angelis | Did Not Participate | |
| Barbara A. Madsen | Signed Majority | Justice Pro Tempore |
| Mary I. Yu | Signed Majority | Justice Pro Tempore |
COUNSEL OF RECORD
| Counsel for Petitioner(s) | |
| | Samantha Dara Kanner |
| | King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office |
| | 516 3rd Ave. Ste. W554 |
| | Seattle, WA, 98104-2390 |
| Counsel for Respondent(s) | |
| | Kevin Andrew March |
| | Mondress Monaco Parr Lockwood PLLC |
| | 2101 4th Ave. Ste. 2170 |
| | Seattle, WA, 98121-2342 |
| | |
| | Jennifer J. Sweigert |
| | Nielsen Koch & Grannis, PLLC |
| | 2200 6th Ave. Ste. 1250 |
| | Seattle, WA, 98121-1820 |
| Amicus Curiae on behalf of Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys | |
| | Madeline Mary Hill |
| | Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney's Office |
| | 930 Tacoma Ave. S., Room 946 |
| | Tacoma, WA, 98402-2102 |
| | |
| | Pamela Beth Loginsky |
| | Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney's Office |
| | 930 Tacoma Ave. S., Room 946 |
| | Tacoma, WA, 98402-2171 |
View the Slip Opinion(s) Filed for this Case.
View a Printer Friendly Version of this Opinion Information Sheet.
Related changes
Get daily alerts for Washington Courts Recent Opinions
Daily digest delivered to your inbox.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
About this page
Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission
Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from WA Supreme Court.
The plain-English summary, classification, and "what to do next" steps are AI-generated from the original text. Cite the source document, not the AI analysis.
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when Washington Courts Recent Opinions publishes new changes.
Subscribed!
Optional. Filters your digest to exactly the updates that matter to you.