In 2021, the Washington Supreme Court published a decision in State v. Blake. 197 Wn.2d 170, 481 P.3d 521 (2021). The impact of the Blake decision was swiftly felt across our state, influencing pending cases, future filings, and the status of Washington state legislation around controlled substances.
The Blake decision addresses a critical aspect of criminal and constitutional law - the right to due process. More specifically, it highlights the constitutional requirement of mens rea and intent as essential elements of culpability in simple possession of controlled substance convictions.
The Blake decision not only had legal implications but also sparked broader discussions about public health, criminal law, and policy. It brought renewed attention to longstanding debates about how best to address substance use disorder - balancing public safety, personal autonomy, access to treatment, and the role of the justice system. These discussions are deeply connected to broader societal concerns, including poverty, racial disparities, and systemic inequities.
It is understandable that this issue evokes strong feelings from many perspectives. Families, friends, and entire communities have been profoundly affected by substance use disorder, often experiencing deep hardship and loss.
While these are critical issues for public health and the functioning of our society, many aspects of the debate fall within the realm of legislative and administrative policymaking. The role of the courts remains focused on applying fact to law in individual cases within a constitutional framework.
The Supreme Court's Blake decision makes one issue clear: RCW 69.50.401 was unconstitutional without a knowledge or intent requirement for simple possession of a controlled substance. As a result, courts across the state have a clear duty to vacate convictions based on this presumptively unconstitutional statute.
Courts have both a legal obligation and an ethical responsibility to adhere to the law as interpreted by our state’s highest court and correct these errors, regardless of individual policy opinions. It is essential to ensure that individuals are not burdened by convictions that, by law, should never have existed.
Like many things, such a process is easier said than done. Every court has different policies and procedures, and prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys, and other stakeholders may disagree on the best process for moving forward. Added to this, many courts are currently operating at - or over - their capacity, without the additional workload of cases to vacate and dismiss. While this work demands significant resources, it is critical to upholding justice and restoring confidence in the fairness of our legal system.
The additional workload created by the Blake decision has delayed the implementation of the required remedy in many jurisdictions, including Edmonds Municipal Court. Like other courts, we have had to prioritize this important work alongside other pressing judicial and administrative responsibilities. While there may be varying perspectives on the intersection of criminality and public health, the Blake decision clearly defines the responsibilities of Washington courts. Moving forward, it is essential that this process be guided by administrative needs and legal requirements, rather than any philosophical or policy disagreements.
Despite the challenges posed by increased workload, Edmonds Municipal Court, with the support of the Washington State Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) and the Washington State Supreme Court, has been able to begin addressing this task effectively. Through grants and technical assistance, we have received crucial support in launching this vital work. We are deeply grateful for their leadership and commitment, which have been essential in getting this project off the ground and ensuring that we can begin providing fair, timely reviews for all affected individuals.
While we have made significant progress, we recognize that the technical challenges arising from this work will require continued dedication and adaptability. We look forward to continuing our work with AOC to navigate these challenges and streamline the technical process for all stakeholders moving forward.
By meeting the demands of the Blake decision, we uphold the Edmonds Municipal Court mission of 'Providing the Community Access to Justice with Respect and Integrity.' We are dedicated to upholding fairness and due process, making sure that every individual affected by this decision receives the careful attention their case requires.
Neil Weiss
Presiding Judge
Edmonds Municipal Court