State Of Washington, Respondent V Joseph Madison Mcclenny, Appellant (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
I. Q. COAT OF APPEALS. DIVISION 11 2014 ScP - 9 PM 9: 22 s BY IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHING DIVISION II No. 45245 -6 -II STATE OF WASHINGTON, Respondent, v. UNPUBLISHED OPINION JOSEPH MADISON MCCLENNY, Appellant. Following a bench trial, the court found Joseph Madison McClenny guilty MELNICK, J. of possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine. McClenny appeals his conviction arguing the trial court erred by failing to enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law. The State concedes error and agrees that the case should be remanded. We accept the State' s concession and remand to the trial court for entry of written findings of facts and conclusions of law as required by law. FACTS Officers arrested Joseph Madison McClenny during a routine traffic stop after dispatch confirmed a valid felony warrant for his arrest existed. Incident to his arrest, the police searched McClenny' s person and found plastic baggies containing several needles and a white crystal substance, which tested positive for methamphetamine. count of possession of methamphetamine. The State charged McClenny with one TON 45245 -6 -II McClenny waived his rights to a jury trial and moved for suppression of evidence under The trial court conducted the CrR 3. 5 hearing and bench trial in one hearing. The court CrR 3. 5. denied McClenny' s CrR 3. 5 motion and convicted him as charged. However, the trial court did not enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law for either the trial or the confession hearing. ANALYSIS The trial court is required to enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law following a bench trial. CrR 6. 1( d). and set Additionally, it is the duty of the court in a confession hearing to record forth in writing "( 1) the undisputed facts; ( 2) the disputed facts; ( 3) conclusions as to the disputed facts; and ( 4) conclusion as to whether the statement is admissible and the reasons CrR 3. 5( c). therefor." These requirements for written findings and conclusions facilitate the appellate review process. no State formal or v. Head, 136 Wn.2d 619, 622, 964 P. 2d 1187 ( 1998). A binding effect ' court' s oral opinion "' has until it is formally incorporated in written findings, conclusions, and judgment. Head, 136 Wn.2d at 622 ( quoting State v. Mallory, 69 Wn.2d 532, 533, 419 P.2d 324 1966)). The trial court' s failure to follow the above -cited rules is remand. Head, 136 Wn.2d at 623. 2 45245 -6 -II Because the trial court did not enter findings of fact and conclusions of law after either the bench trial or the CrR 3. 5 hearing, we accept the State' s concession and remand to the trial court with directions that it enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law as required. A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 2. 06. 040, it is so ordered. We concur:
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
