# State v. Kintz

> Washington Supreme Court · August 26, 2010 · 169 Wash. 2d 537

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4714440

## Case

- **Full name:** The State of Washington v. Clarence Andrew Kintz
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** August 26, 2010
- **Citations:** 169 Wash. 2d 537
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Chambers
- **Judges:** Alexander, Chambers, Fairhurst, Johnson, Madsen, Owens, Sanders, Stephens
- **Cited by:** 187 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4714440

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that Washington’s stalking statute requires person to “intentionally and repeatedly harass[]” or “repeatedly follow[]” another and defines “‘repeatedly’” to mean “‘two or more separate occasions’”

## Opinion text

Chambers, J.
¶75 (concurrence in dissent) — I agree with Justice Sanders that RCW 9A.46.110 is subject to more than one reasonable interpretation and that the rule of lenity requires that we find for the defendant. Therefore, I would reverse.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4714440. Public record. Not legal advice.