Judge Richard Jones

Noted for Friday, July 18, 2003

Without Oral Argument

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING

 

ROGER W. KNIGHT,                                    )

                                                                        )           No.  03-2-27325-2 SEA

                                    petitioner,                     )

                                                                        )           PETITIONER’S MOTION FOR LEAVE

            v.                                                         )           TO FILE OVERLONG BRIEF

                                                                        )

STATE OF WASHINGTON, and                   )

DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND               )

HEALTH SERVICES,                                     )

                                                                        )

                                    respondent.                  )

____________________________________)

 

            COMES NOW ROGER W. KNIGHT, to move for leave to file an overlong brief.

1. RELIEF REQUESTED:

            An order by this Court granting petitioner leave to file an overlong brief of up to 40 pages.  The respondent should also be allowed to file such an overlong brief of up to 40 pages.

2.  STATEMENT OF FACTS:

            In Mr. Knight’s previous and successful appeal of two convictions for Driving While License Suspended (DWLS), City of Mercer Island v. Knight, King County Superior Court, No. 02-1-01137-0 SEA, the petitioner filed a brief of 34 pages.  Please see Exhibit C to the Declaration of Roger W. Knight in Support of  Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File Overlong Brief (Knight Declaration II).  Because Mr. Knight claimed that the Bellevue District Court had jurisdiction to consider the Smith and Cruz test for retroactive application and the validity of the WorkFirst Act as applied and on its face, Mr. Knight had to plead these other issues in case this Court found it could rule on them.

3.  STATEMENT OF ISSUES:

            Should Mr. Knight and the State each be granted leave to file an overlong brief of up to 40 pages?

4.  EVIDENCE RELIED UPON:

            Declaration of Roger W. Knight in Support of Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File Overlong Brief (Knight Declaration II) and attached Exhibit.

            The record and pleadings filed herein.

5.  LEGAL AUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT:

            In his appeal of the convictions for DWLS last year, Mr. Knight raised five assignments of error as to the applicability of the WorkFirst Act to a pre-existing child support order and arrearage and as to the validity of the statute: Smith and Cruz test[1], WorkFirst Act as a bill of attainder and/or an ex post facto law; WorkFirst Act as a Multi-Subject bill prohibited by Article II section 19 of the Washington Constitution; no rational basis for the policy of license suspensions as set forth in RCW 74.20A.320; and that the attempt through license suspension to coerce consent to a repayment agreement which would necessarily require employment is declared null and void by 42 U.S.C. §1994, the Antipeonage Act.  To plead these issue, and he pled them with abbreviated arguments; he used 16 pages of his 34 page brief.

            Because the jurisdiction of this Court to hear and decide these issues in an administrative law appeal as provided by RCW 34.05.570 is without question, the argument for each of these issues will have to be expanded to provide this Court full consideration.  In addition to the issue previously raise, the Amended Petition in this case raise as issues that the prohibition of consideration of inability to comply with the support order is offensive to due process, invidiously discriminates in violation of the right to equal protection, and that the statutory scheme is not rationally related to the activities licensed.

            The argument against the WorkFirst Act as a multi-subject bill will have to be revised to account for the clarifications of the test for rational unity set forth in Washington Association of Neighborhood Stores v. State of Washington, (May 8, 2003) ____ Wash. 2d. ____; Citizens for Responsible Wildlife Management et al v. State of Washington, (June 19, 2003) ____ Wash. 2d. ____; and the upcoming decision in Pierce County et al v. State of Washington, the Initiative 776 case, for which oral argument was heard on June 26, 2003.

            Further consideration will have to be made for Bennett v. State of Washington, (Div. II, June 3, 2003) ___ Wash. App. ____ and any subsequent events in that case, as it involves a challenge to the WorkFirst Act as a multi-subject bill.

            Mr. Knight will also have to evaluate and plead the effects of the recent United States Supreme Court decisions in Lawrence v. Texas, (June 26, 2003) 123 S. Ct. ____ as to fundamental rights and state interest; and Strogner v. California, (June 26, 2003) 123 S. Ct. ____ as to what constitutes an unconstitutional ex post facto law. Such evaluations may require several pages each.

            For the reasons stated herein, this Court should grant leave to each party to file an overlong brief of up to 40 pages.

6.  PROPOSED ORDER:

            A copy of the proposed Order is provided hereto.

Respectfully submitted, July 7, 2003,

                                                            ____________________________________

                                                            Roger W. Knight, pro se

                                                            Petitioner