State v. Hendrickson

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court considered whether a trial court properly entered a nunc pro tunc order correcting a dismissal order that appeared to dismiss the defendant’s entire case rather than only the unresolved possession charge. The court held that the error was clerical, the nunc pro tunc order accurately reflected the trial court’s intent, and its entry was not an abuse of discretion.

Holdings

1. A nunc pro tunc order may be used to correct a clerical or ministerial error and make the record reflect an action the trial court actually intended to take and believed it was taking; it may not be used to change the court's mind or correct a judicial error.
2. The trial court did not lack jurisdiction to enter the nunc pro tunc order, and the order would not be set aside on jurisdictional grounds.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a nunc pro tunc order may correct an order that, because of inartful drafting, failed to accurately record the trial court's action and intention.
2. Whether the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the nunc pro tunc order after the earlier order appeared to dismiss the entire case.
3. Whether a clear-and-convincing-evidence standard should govern entry of a nunc pro tunc order.

Disposition

affirmed